gruden

ClassyLady's post is all you need. The person who runs the website linked before me tends to think that going into the details of the occult practice in question somehow helps. I tend to agree with the Pres. Faust quote, which is not to focus on that stuff at all. Going into detail about occultic practices can be counter-productive, because sometimes it arouses interest in things that should be left alone, even if the intent is to say it's bad. But I suppose leaving things simply at a stern warning doesn't sell books or bring web site visitors.

Phoenix, For most of my life, I've been the outsider in many wards, sometimes given a hard time and not included in things. There are different reasons, many of them I can't control, but I do treasure the friendships I have had in the past and hope they will come again. In any case, my suggestion for you is to find the Lord's will for you and do it. This will give you purpose, increased spirituality, and draw your attention away from things that are slowing you down. Whatever members may or may not do, the Lord is there. You can always count on Him. And that's the point, isn't it? We get so wrapped up in the Church and all the busy work and the meetings and the he-said-she-said that we lose the big picture. Your salvation does not depend on what anyone else does. What it depends on is your ability to draw close to the Lord. We have been promised that if we seek Him earnestly, we will find Him. So what are you waiting for?! Go do it and God bless.

This is the government model for 'creating' jobs: dump a bunch of money into the economy and hope a miracle happens. This - and what you put forth - is not the model of a self-sustaining economy. Just because someone chopped down some trees and sent lumber to SLC doesn't mean you've done anything long-term for the economy. After that's done, people are standing around hoping for more orders to come through. Since the Church invested in retail business, not production, there's no guarantee of anything when the dust settles. What I proposed, on the other hand, was a way in which self-sustaining industry can be kick-started. I remember reading of Brigham Young and other early church leaders speaking many times of the need to be industrious and production-oriented as the means of creating a vibrant, self-sustaining economy that would be good for the Saints. My, how things have changed. Check out what Hugh Nibley said in Approaching Zion. The answer would be 'yes', and I tend to agree with him.

I would direct you to D&C 24:9 speaking to Joseph Smith: And in temporal labors thou shalt not have strength, for this is not thy calling... How a person fares in business has nothing to do with how smart they are. There are brilliant people who do poorly and idiots who are very rich. Joseph Smith was a spiritual giant, yet the church was perpetually broke during his ministry, and the Lord told us why. The notion of people amassing wealth purely by hard work and playing it smart echoes the philosophies written of in the Book of Mormon by the name of Korihor. We have to be careful of internalizing these philosophies without understanding what they mean. It is not our spiritual birthright to have great material blessings - though it can happen. If it does, it is because God permitted it. And, as the other poster pointed out, the Church almost went bankrupt in the 50s, so no, things have been financially precarious for the Church on more than one occasion. I'm sure there's a lesson for us in there somewhere. And if any of us know nothing, it's because we haven't made much effort. One can learn about most anything if one puts the requisite effort forth...

Not that I care what the critics say, but why not? The Church company is out to make money on this - everyone knows it - and it could turn out disastrous. I won't gloat, I will mourn. Can you show me a family of four (or more) where the father works as a salesclerk at Nordstroms and earns sufficient so that his wife can remain at home with the kids (and put food on the table and a roof overhead)? Without going on the dole? That is, unless everyone is abandoning church traditional values completely and give in to the Babylonian way, in which case I will cede the point. That's a fair question, but there's another way to look at it. The Church sunk $3 Billion into this project. I've searched around the net and the estimates I found were that it would create 1,700 jobs. Divide that out, that means the Church spent 1.7 million dollars per job. Are you telling me that's the most efficient way to create jobs? That's worse than the government! Small business is the job creation engine of the economy. If they really wanted to bless the lives of church members, they could setup a venture capital firm to fund startups, and I can pretty much guarantee if they put $3 Billion into it they could've come up with FAR more than 1,700 jobs. Is that a good enough idea? The effects of an organization sinking that amount of money into small business creation would be massive, and would truly be a blessing to members throughout the valley and beyond. And, it's not a dole. Businesses would have to pay the loan back, which would be on good terms to benefit both the lender and borrower. Maybe mine isn't the best idea, but sinking gobs of money into a confined retail/condo project is far worse in regard to job creation. Again, there are other ways to look at this. First, even if the Church could scrape together $3 billion, that puts a serious hurt on the cash flow. Even multi-billion dollar conglomerates have to be careful putting deals like this together. Most get loans, which preserves cash and cash flow. If the Church expended most of its cash reserves to outright pay for this, that puts it in a precarious position if there are shortfalls below revenue projections. In other words, just because you can buy something outright doesn't mean you can afford to keep it. If revenues from the project falls short, that's going to put the Church in a serious fiscal bind. What I find amazing that in our current economic climate where unoccupied commercial real estate is at all-time highs, and foreclosures continue unabated, how any member can feel comfortable with this project. The Church has a major exposure in sections of the economy at greatest risk. If revenues are low, the Church is forced to cover and re-allocate, and that's where things start to get hairy. Sure, we might not have to cover shortfalls, but shortfalls mean funds coming into the ecclesiastic side of the church dry up, which removes the point for which the enterprise side exists! At the end we come to an agreeable point. Again, my point isn't that the Church shouldn't have profitable enterprises, the point is the Church is still a church, even if it operates businesses, and these businesses should have the aim of promoting the most good for its members and community. The Church has sunk enormous sums into a project that will benefit few at-large, and carries large ramifications should it fail. The Church is a pearl of great price, and its fortunes need to be protected carefully. This deeply concerns me, it really does, and to get back to the OP, I can see why it concerns the inactive brother. Nevertheless, I carry on, and I hope the OP can help him come to the realization that his salvation doesn't depend on the Church's balance sheet.

What's to win? The church's purpose is to guide souls back to Christ. What else matters?

He has some valid concerns that do concern me. For me, I never go to tithing settlement. The question is covered in the temple interview and that's good enough for me. People who don't pay their tithing usually don't go anyway. A lot of people have used the pat answer that the mall project doesn't use tithing money for the project, which is technically true, yet doesn't cover many financial realities, such as how the Church has raised money (ie. gotten loans) in the past and how it guarantees any loans it may currently get. The point is, at some time along the way, the Church has had to use church property (including temples) as collateral for business loans. And the fact is, there are serious questions in my mind why the church - even its business arm - would invest such incredible sums of money in a confined project which does little good for church members. The lasting impact is merely a relatively small number of retail jobs which don't pay the best. Can a man support his family solely from a job selling shoes at Nordstroms? In the past the Church has used its funds to by lands for raising food to feed its members via welfare. This project benefits relatively few - major construction firms, bankers, and the investor(s). If this project goes sour, where does the money come from to pay for it? Many didn't notice that one of the Church's insurance companies had to cover a major loss of $500M last year. How many times can it afford to do that? More importantly, what happens if it no longer can? Meanwhile our ward budget gets cut every year. So, I have similar concerns, yet I still believe and remain active. The simple answer is that my faith neither depends on what the church does nor what its members do. My faith comes from a testimony that Jesus lives, that Joseph Smith restored His gospel, that the Book of Mormon is an ancient Christian record, and that the ordinances performed in this church are necessary for the salvation of all people. That's it. The church is a vehicle for teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, organizing the practice of important ordinances for the living and dead, and providing service opportunities. If one focuses on Christ, he can take all the strange and nonsensical things that happen in stride. I have striven to make my testimony completely independent of any human. Christ is the foundation. If the Church chooses to act increasingly like a corporation, it still doesn't affect my ability to grow closer to God, nor your friend. Tell him to get going and focus on what's important!

How much do you trust God?

As a missionary years ago, there was a member who had previously been a Jehovah's Witness. He told me of a conversation he had with the Stake Pres. shortly after he joined where he expressed regret for 'wasting his time' with the JW's. The Stake Pres. informed him he had not wasted his time, but was a necessary part of his spiritual progression. Many churches stress certain doctrines, and the JW church had what he needed at the time to further his spiritual progression to the point where he was ready to move on. Everything is line-by-line, precept upon precept. Other churches can help fill in certain holes to get us ready for greater light and knowledge. The trick is not to stop, but keep pressing forward.

Of course. Which do you think Nephi was referring to in that verse? Which of those was Nephi repeatedly delivered from in his story?

Yet some were not delivered, like Abinadi, the Apostle Steven, John the Baptist, or even Joseph Smith. As Alma told Amulek in Alma 14:13: And Alma said: Be it according to the will of the Lord. But, behold, our work is not finished; therefore they burn us not. Some are called to seal their testimony with their blood, others are not.

Right. In those cases the next best thing was a mountain. Moses, Elijah and Nephi (and possibly the Bro. of Jared) were called up to a mountain for important communications. Jesus went to a mountain for the Transfiguration. The Israelites hauled around a big tent for 40 years as the center of religious service. Clearly God will make do when the situation calls for it. Ideally we ourselves should be a temple - we can be made holy the same way. The Spirit of God then lives in us and we are one with God.

Apex, when I looks at this scripture excerpt, what I read is not Peter talking about how the earth was created/reformed, but speaking to what kinds of attitudes people will have in the latter days and how it compares to the past. In vv 3-4 he's talking about how people in the last days will scoff at the idea of Christ returning. In verse 4 he specifically says how people will say that the earth will continue on like it always has been and nothing will ever change (ie. Christ will never come again, life as we know it will just go on). Then in vv 5-7 what Peter first does is remind them that the earth has in the past undergone very dramatic changes that upset the status quo, and likens the destruction by water (the Flood) to the fire that will engulf the earth during the second coming. He's basically contradicting this attitude by making the point that things have changed violently before and will change again in similar fashion. Things will not continue on as they seemingly have from humans' very limited perspective. He then goes on in vv. 8-9 to make the point that what seems like a long time to us is a short time to the Lord, so we shouldn't mistake the passage of centuries without dramatic events for inattention by the Lord or that the events of the second Coming won't be fulfilled. He's saying what happened once will happen again, so watch it! BTW, be sure to read the JST of these verses which make it a bit more clear.

Hmmm, I'm reading that verse I and don't see how your comment matches what Alma said. I think you're basing that on the idea that destruction is an escape from punishment. How often have we read in the scriptures where destruction is the punishment? I can't think of a greater destruction than to cease to exist. You can't destroy an intelligence because it cannot be made (D&C 93:29). I've yet to find anything that says a soul cannot be destroyed. When I read things like Joseph Smith and Lorenzo Snow were threatened with spiritual destruction if they didn't accept polygamy, that makes me sit up and take notice, as I'm sure they did. Yikes!

I also found this interesting quote by Brigham Young that might shed some additional light on the subject: We can, at the present time, go into the Endowment House and be baptized for the dead, receive our washings and anointing, etc., for there we have a font that has been erected, dedicated expressly for baptizing people for the remission of sins, for their health and for their dead friends; in this the Saints have the privilege of being baptized for their friends. We also have the privilege of sealing women to men, without a Temple. This we can do in the Endowment House; but when we come to other sealing ordinances, ordinances pertaining to the holy Priesthood, to connect the chain of the Priesthood from father Adam until now, by sealing children to their parents, being sealed for our forefathers, etc., they cannot be done without a Temple. But we can seal women to men, but not men to men, without a Temple. When the ordinances are carried out in the Temples that will be erected, men will be sealed to their fathers, and those who have slept clear up to father Adam. JD 16:187, Brigham Young, September 4, 1873