Non US members and "tithing member units"

[_Sethbag]

In other words, you think most "active" members are fakers. I find that hard to believe. Tithing is hard to swallow for a church you don't believe in. May as well go to some other cheaper church if you're a faker.

Not if all your family and relatives, and friends, are in this one.

I notice that in this particular thread you keep disputing points by arguing the absurd. That technique helps when making out a trend makes a difference in the argument. In this case, it doesn't, and arguing the absurd simply fails.

The church doesn't encourage everyone to become doctors because not everyone can become doctors. Someone has to be a patient. :-) They encourage success in whatever a person is inclined to pursue as a career (within limits of course - no gigolos please), and then take the tithing money that results.

I may not be as focused on tithing revenues as PP or Mercury are, but they are important for the church. Very important.

I think there is a valid point to be made, that the church will do what's in the best interests of those pay most of the tithing, and those who don't will get the crumbs. That's just human nature, and since this is a very human venture, it's only natural that it would work out this way.

[_neworder]

16 years ago while serving a mission in California I was blown away by a statement that my missionary president said to the missionaries. He told us that we need to focus more on baptizing people that were more "well off" because their tithing dollars is what is going to make the Church grow more in the future.

I was totally blown away thinking how weird it was to go after those who made more money but I was naïve and thought he was inspired so we tried getting more member referrals from those who were rich including Pro Golfer Johnny Miller. We ate at his house at least once a month and he was even a ward missionary that we worked with. At least when he was in town.

I don't think we ever baptized anybody over middle class and most of the people I baptized would be considered to be in poverty.

[_asbestosman]

The church doesn't encourage everyone to become doctors because not everyone can become doctors. Someone has to be a patient. :-)

Yes, of course. It was only an example of a profession that wold earn more. They could have encoraged me to enter a number of various professions.

They encourage success in whatever a person is inclined to pursue as a career (within limits of course - no gigolos please), and then take the tithing money that results.

I see the church encouraging self-sufficiency. I do not see it encouraging wealth for the sake of wealth. When I see encouragement for more education, it's about becoming self-sufficient. I have seen no evidence that the church looks down on self-sufficient farmers or what have you. The church doesn't ecourage mothers to work despite the fact that my neighbors have figured out ways to be mothers and work.

I may not be as focused on tithing revenues as PP or Mercury are, but they are important for the church. Very important.

Of course it is. Tithing pays for the operationsof the church such as meetinghouses, utilities, etc.

I think there is a valid point to be made, that the church will do what's in the best interests of those pay most of the tithing, and those who don't will get the crumbs. That's just human nature, and since this is a very human venture, it's only natural that it would work out this way.

But that's just what I dispute. I have not seen any evidence of this in the case of the church.

Perhaps it would help for me to try to clarify what I'm really getting at. I think the church cares primarily about how many people believe in and obey the doctrines of the church (yes, including tithing). I do not think that the dollar amount of tithing is their goal at all. I do believe that the church wishes to be wise with their finances and as such hopes that most new converts are self-sufficient. It's hard to keep an organization running if most new converts join in order to receive welfare benefits. That's why I think self-sufficiency is vital. But I think that for the leaders of the church, the primary goal is to increase the number of faithful members as well as strengthen their faithfulness. I have a hard time imagining that the leaders are in it for the money. The last inference is what I strongly dispute and it is why I find it hard to even find plausible the idea that the leadership of the church cares more about the interests of those who pay more tithing.

[_Mercury]

Last I looked, the church cared about the size of my testimony, not my paycheck. I didn't see them encouraging me to take the job with the most money at the expense of time with my family--quite the opposite actually. I need to provide sufficiently for my family (which I do) and then try to find a job that will let me spend as much time as possible on other important activities (Family Home Evening, Ward Activities, member-missionary efforts, service projects, temple work, geneology, etc.).

Really? So you can get your temple recommend denied for not paying tithing but if you never bear your testimony in sacrament meeting that is not grounds for having your TR revoked. Hmm, whats more important to the corporation then? Hmm?

All they want is the money. They don't give a damn about what you believe.

[_quaker]

I find it hard to believe that the posters on this thread have spent any time around an LDS church, or if they are capable of learning or observing reality in an LDS church. Literally all of the posts are based on pure fantasy with the exception of asbestosman who may be the only person who has in the past 50 years stepped inside an LDS building?

If the comments are genuine then it's like these people failed out of the pyramid scheme at level sunbeam or maybe earlier. I prefer to think the posters are simply playing dumb with one another.