Does God want members of His Church to prosper financially?

[WillowTheWhisp]

What portion of our income do we allocate toward the purchase of new assets, or the maintenance of existing assets? Whatever portion that is, it is our capital improvement. If we are not making any capital improvements, we need to lower our expenses and start doing so. If that means getting rid of liabilities, (think car, house, boat, whatever) so be it. We need not be attached. We should have no emotion for a house or a car or what have you. It is simply a dead material object.

I'm confused by something here. What would be the benefit of getting rid of our house? We would still need somewhere to live. We have a mortgage so the sale of the house may not realise much equity and we would have to pay rent for somewhere else for ourselves and our family to live. The rent could often be higher than the mortgage payment so we would end up worse off. In our case if we sold the car it would cost us more to get to church - or we could simply stop going, neither of which would be an advantage. We don't have a boat

As you can probably guess I have a computer but my daughters both need internet access at home for their school and college work. I don't think I'd get much for selling it and that would inconvenience them greatly for their homework.

[Snow]

I'm still waiting for your proof of these claims that you stated you had. I wonder how you were even able to find such proof. I'm wondering if you even have any since all you seem able to do is state your claims over and over and over again without offering any proof.

All ya gotta do is ask. Here you go:

1. You go around the internet posting on various message boards about your PDF - The Science of Getting Rich God's Way - normally $29.95 and a seminar that normally costs $500 that you are now giving away free.

Substantiation:

Book normally $29.95, now free: The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way

Seminar normally $500, now free: FREE Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way Seminar Also see post 82 of this thread.

Posts on other message boards, examples: The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way at Law of Attraction: The Secret and The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way - Thoughts.com Forums

2. Mostly you are ignored at the other message boards or you get negative responses about your promotion.

Substantiation: see above

3. You don't have a legitimate job - rather you have a franchise of Robert Kiyosaki's (RICH DAD) CASHFLOW CLUB. Note: later clarified that it wasn’t a franchise, rather a CASHFLOW CLUB that uses Kiyosaki’s RICH DAD board game:

Substantiation:

See post 82 of this thread.

See also: AZpurplerat50 Rich Dad Customer Service Rep: Kevin Sparks CASHFLOW 101 Board Game Club and Worldwide Success Network

4. You host these CASHFLOW CLUBS where people come together and play a board that supposedly teaches principles like investment and accounting... and of course, getting rich.

5. CASHFLOW CLUB members can buy board game which looks like the board game Life for about $200.

Susbstantiation: Amazon.com: Rich Dad Cashflow 101: Toys & Games Search around, you can find it for less.

6. There are other products and services - maybe even some multilevel upstream downstream stuff - for sale, all based around financial independence.

Substantiation: See the link above. I do not know whether the OP sells these things or not. The OP says that he does not sell the game. In googling around for CASH FLOW CLUBS I found some web pages that talk about multi-level stuff and fees and bringing on people under you. But as I implied, I do not know and am only speculating.

7. You are promoting your Get Rich PDF in conjunction with your CASH FLOW CLUB - that is, having the PDF and seminar on getting rich God's way is a a clever little way to distinguish you from the other CASH FLOW CLUB franchisees - and it targets a specific audience - Christians - and now Mormons.

Substantion:

See: FREE Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way Seminar and

Worldwide Success Network

8. The response on LDS.net is by far the best response you've gotten on any of the internet message boards you've posted on.

Substantiation: See this thread, compare to links in #1 above

9. Mormons are notoriously susceptible to propaganda, fraud and get rich schemes, especially when the opportunities come from other Mormons. Utah (you are in Arizona) is often referred to as the fraud capital. Mormons are also notorious for bankruptcy - Utah often leading the nation in bankruptcy rates and sometimes called the bankruptcy capital.

Substantiation:

Google: Utah bankruptcy capital or

Google: Utah fraud capital

10. You've made sure that we know that you are LDS and a returned missionary.

Substantiation:

See post #73 of this thread

11. You joined this message board 2 weeks ago. Solomon-helaman joined right after that and many or most of his posts have been on your thread. His posts on this thread don't just respond to other posts but pump up your whole concept of getting rich. For example, he summed up one of his lengthy posts this way:

"There is nothing wrong with trying to be rich, and I would suggest that God wants righteous saints to succeed financially. We just need to continue with the focus to build up god's kingdom. Let's stop thinking like the poor and start thinking like the rich who are as He says, "His People".

It's interesting that both your and his posts are similar in content and look and feel. The use of asking questions and answering them yourself - use of bold text, the use of blocks of blue text - the prosperity gospel angle. You both calling out to ignore me - the critic of this kind of crass get-rich tripe. He agrees with you and then you post and agree with him - very nice to have shrill to pique the interest in your thread and lend credibility.

Substantiation:

sgrGODSway: member since 3/11/2009

solomon helaman: member since 3/19/2009

See posts various posts on this thread for comparison. You might start with #’s73, 74, 97, 98, 101, 102

12. Your PDF - as we both know - is dishonest - it promotes a falsehood as evidence that your get-rich method works. You claim in it that you have a friend that taught your method to a student who then used it to get a rug and stove and bay widow for his house.

That's completely untrue - Why won't you admit that you plagiarized it from another book and you have no such friend?

Substation:

From the posters PDF (which you can get from him via email):

“A friend of mine, who teaches the Laws that govern the acquisition of Prosperity

and Abundance, told me how he worked with one of his students. He told his

student that the student must get in mind a clear picture of the thing he desired,

so that the creative thought might be impressed on formless substance. This

student was a very poor man, living in a rented house, and having only what he

earned from day to day. The student couldn't grasp the fact that all wealth was

his. After thinking things over he decided he might reasonably ask for a new rug

for the floor of his best room and an anthracite coal stove to heat the house

during the cold winter. Following the instruction from my friend, and those

instructions are the same as those also contained in this book, he obtained these

two things within a few months. When that happened, it dawned on the man that

he had not asked for enough. He then went through his house and planned all the

improvements he would like to make in the house. He added a bay window here

and added on a room there, until it was as complete in his mind as his ideal

home.”

Now: Go to the real book from which sgrGODSway plagarized his PDF. The same passage it lifted (with only a few word changes) from page 61. You can find the book on Google Books. Here’s a link:

The Science of Getting Rich - Google Book Search

Four out of four passages I checked were plagiarized.

Edited March 24, 2009 by Snow

[sgrGODSway]

Qoute from The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way Preface:

Much of what I have written in this book has its origins in scripture and also from a book written over 100 years ago by a man named Wallace Wattles. That book is titled The Science of Getting Rich. What I have done is take that material and given it more of a Christian twist and perspective. I believe Mr. Wattles was a Christian, but he wrote the book from a perspective that was more scientific.

Snow

To quote you I will say "Bull!" , but I am glad you are having fun coming up with your own incorrect conclusions ... like was said in the movie Dumb and Dumber, "Oh Samsonite, I was way off!"

I'll tell you what. If you get an assumption 100% correct I will say "yes" to it, but unless you are 100% correct, like you expect everyone who posts anything anywhere on this forum to be, I will no longer comment to you. I am not going to play the "hot & cold game." Now you'll really have to hire a PI and make some phone calls because you will actually need to talk with Cashflow Club members, who attend the Cashflow Club...and the 40 plus people I have taught the workshop to in the months of November and January.

Good luck to you. If your tone with them is like your tone with most posters you probably won't get very far because nobody will want to talk with you...but good luck to you. You have actually made this kind of fun because you have wasted a lot of time and have proved nothing. All you've done is come to your own personal conclusions and have wished to state those conclusions as facts.

Thank you for the fun and entertainment ...before I was getting annoyed but now I am just getting a laugh...because it has gotten to the point of just plain silly :D

Snow

To quote you again:

There is nothing more pathetic than the anti anti-mormon Colonel Louis/Lewis Tucker I guess now there is!

Oh, that's funny!!!

Smiles

If you chance to meet a frown,

Do not let it stay.

Quickly turn it upside down

And smile that frown away.

No one likes a frowning face.

Change it for a smile.

Make the world a better place

By smiling all the while.

Edited March 24, 2009 by sgrGODSway

[hordak]

All ya gotta do is ask. Here you go:

1. You go around the internet posting on various message boards about your PDF - The Science of Getting Rich God's Way - normally $29.95 and a seminar that normally costs $500 that you are now giving away free.

Substantiation:

Book normally $29.95, now free: The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way

Seminar normally $500, now free: FREE Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way Seminar Also see post 82 of this thread.

Posts on other message boards, examples: The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way at Law of Attraction: The Secret and The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way - Thoughts.com Forums

2. Mostly you are ignored at the other message boards or you get negative responses about your promotion.

Substantiation: see above

3. You don't have a legitimate job - rather you have a franchise of Robert Kiyosaki's (RICH DAD) CASHFLOW CLUB. Note: later clarified that it wasn’t a franchise, rather a CASHFLOW CLUB that uses Kiyosaki’s RICH DAD board game:

Substantiation:

See post 82 of this thread.

See also: AZpurplerat50 Rich Dad Customer Service Rep: Kevin Sparks CASHFLOW 101 Board Game Club and Worldwide Success Network

4. You host these CASHFLOW CLUBS where people come together and play a board that supposedly teaches principles like investment and accounting... and of course, getting rich.

5. CASHFLOW CLUB members can buy board game which looks like the board game Life for about $200.

Susbstantiation: Amazon.com: Rich Dad Cashflow 101: Toys & Games Search around, you can find it for less.

6. There are other products and services - maybe even some multilevel upstream downstream stuff - for sale, all based around financial independence.

Substantiation: See the link above. I do not know whether the OP sells these things or not. The OP says that he does not sell the game. In googling around for CASH FLOW CLUBS I found some web pages that talk about multi-level stuff and fees and bringing on people under you. But as I implied, I do not know and am only speculating.

7. You are promoting your Get Rich PDF in conjunction with your CASH FLOW CLUB - that is, having the PDF and seminar on getting rich God's way is a a clever little way to distinguish you from the other CASH FLOW CLUB franchisees - and it targets a specific audience - Christians - and now Mormons.

Substantion:

See: FREE Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way Seminar and

Worldwide Success Network

8. The response on LDS.net is by far the best response you've gotten on any of the internet message boards you've posted on.

Substantiation: See this thread, compare to links in #1 above

9. Mormons are notoriously susceptible to propaganda, fraud and get rich schemes, especially when the opportunities come from other Mormons. Utah (you are in Arizona) is often referred to as the fraud capital. Mormons are also notorious for bankruptcy - Utah often leading the nation in bankruptcy rates and sometimes called the bankruptcy capital.

Substantiation:

Google: Utah bankruptcy capital or

Google: Utah fraud capital

10. You've made sure that we know that you are LDS and a returned missionary.

Substantiation:

See post #73 of this thread

11. You joined this message board 2 weeks ago. Solomon-helaman joined right after that and many or most of his posts have been on your thread. His posts on this thread don't just respond to other posts but pump up your whole concept of getting rich. For example, he summed up one of his lengthy posts this way:

"There is nothing wrong with trying to be rich, and I would suggest that God wants righteous saints to succeed financially. We just need to continue with the focus to build up god's kingdom. Let's stop thinking like the poor and start thinking like the rich who are as He says, "His People".

It's interesting that both your and his posts are similar in content and look and feel. The use of asking questions and answering them yourself - use of bold text, the use of blocks of blue text - the prosperity gospel angle. You both calling out to ignore me - the critic of this kind of crass get-rich tripe. He agrees with you and then you post and agree with him - very nice to have shrill to pique the interest in your thread and lend credibility.

Substantiation:

sgrGODSway: member since 3/11/2009

solomon helaman: member since 3/19/2009

See posts various posts on this thread for comparison. You might start with #’s73, 74, 97, 98, 101, 102

12. Your PDF - as we both know - is dishonest - it promotes a falsehood as evidence that your get-rich method works. You claim in it that you have a friend that taught your method to a student who then used it to get a rug and stove and bay widow for his house.

That's completely untrue - Why won't you admit that you plagiarized it from another book and you have no such friend?

Substation:

From the posters PDF (which you can get from him via email):

“A friend of mine, who teaches the Laws that govern the acquisition of Prosperity

and Abundance, told me how he worked with one of his students. He told his

student that the student must get in mind a clear picture of the thing he desired,

so that the creative thought might be impressed on formless substance. This

student was a very poor man, living in a rented house, and having only what he

earned from day to day. The student couldn't grasp the fact that all wealth was

his. After thinking things over he decided he might reasonably ask for a new rug

for the floor of his best room and an anthracite coal stove to heat the house

during the cold winter. Following the instruction from my friend, and those

instructions are the same as those also contained in this book, he obtained these

two things within a few months. When that happened, it dawned on the man that

he had not asked for enough. He then went through his house and planned all the

improvements he would like to make in the house. He added a bay window here

and added on a room there, until it was as complete in his mind as his ideal

home.”

Now: Go to the real book from which sgrGODSway plagarized his PDF. The same passage it lifted (with only a few word changes) from page 61. You can find the book on Google Books. Here’s a link:

The Science of Getting Rich - Google Book Search

Four out of four passages I checked were plagiarized.

Are you a Plinkerton?

[Snow]

Qoute from The Science of Getting Rich GOD's Way Preface:

Much of what I have written in this book has its origins in scripture and also from a book written over 100 years ago by a man named Wallace Wattles. That book is titled The Science of Getting Rich. What I have done is take that material and given it more of a Christian twist and perspective. I believe Mr. Wattles was a Christian, but he wrote the book from a perspective that was more scientific.

Snow

To quote you I will say "Bull!" , but I am glad you are having fun coming up with your own incorrect conclusions ... like was said in the movie Dumb and Dumber, "Oh Samsonite, I was way off!"

I'll tell you what. If you get an assumption 100% correct I will say "yes" to it, but unless you are 100% correct, like you expect everyone who posts anything anywhere on this forum to be, I will no longer comment to you. I am not going to play the "hot & cold game." Now you'll really have to hire a PI and make some phone calls because you will actually need to talk with Cashflow Club members, who attend the Cashflow Club...and the 40 plus people I have taught the workshop to in the months of November and January.

Good luck to you. If your tone with them is like your tone with most posters you probably won't get very far because nobody will want to talk with you...but good luck to you. You have actually made this kind of fun because you have wasted a lot of time and have proved nothing. All you've done is come to your own personal conclusions and have wished to state those conclusions as facts.

Thank you for the fun and entertainment ...before I was getting annoyed but now I am just getting a laugh...because it has gotten to the point of just plain silly :D

Snow

To quote you again:

There is nothing more pathetic than the anti anti-mormon Colonel Louis/Lewis Tucker I guess now there is!

Oh, that's funny!!!

I challenged you to point out any factual mistakes. You haven't - with the exception of the correction on franchising.

I challenge you a second time.

I suspect that I will have to challenge you a third time and you'll still won't be able to.

[sgrGODSway]

Snow

:):)

:lol:

There are more. Guess which ones?

[Snow]

Are you a Plinkerton?

It was 17 minutes on the internet - less time than the OP probably took types some of his posts.

I don't begrudge anyone making a living - even a really good living. It's not my cup of tea but I don't care that some people go for get rich promises like CASH FLOW Clubs or whatever it claims to be.

What is bothersome is the plagiarism and the absurd claim that there is a scientific path to get rich God's way and that positive thinking can make it so.

[Snow]

Snow

:):)

:lol:

When are you going to respond to the already demonstrated proof of plagiarism and false claims in your PDF?

Do you lack the integrity to admit and apologize for what you have done wrong?

[sgrGODSway]

Already done. Post 118

:):)

:lol::lol:

Edited March 24, 2009 by sgrGODSway

[Snow]

Already done. Post 118

:):)

:lol::lol:

That's completely untrue.

You simply reiterated your previous statement that much of what you wrote (claim to have written) has it's origin in someone else book and the scriptures. That does not give you license to plagiarize and make false claims in the first person. Anyone with a high school education knows about the rules of plagiarizing and proper citation and quotation. Unless you are going to tell us that you never went to high school, it is a safe assumption that your plagiarism is intentional.

You claim to be LDS and Christian. Let see if you have the integrity that even non-members expect of Mormons.

Here is a website that outlines plagiarism and acceptable "borrowing" techniques.

How to Avoid Plagiarism

The website includes:

"Direct Quotes: Must include quote marks or be inset and must include a citation"

Unacceptable paraphrasing and acceptable paraphrasing.

Other strategies and words of wisdom on honest writing.

Moreover... you should never pretend that someone else's experiences are your own like you did when you wrote in the first person about a friend of yours and his student - you have no such friend - that was the experience of someone else entirely.

Again... let's see if you have the integrity that members of the Church are expected to have.

[sgrGODSway]

yawn:)

Snow

you said:

"safe assumption"

You have made assumptions in this thread as well as in almost all your threads. "Safe assumption(s)"...not really, in my case as well as in the case of all the people you "intentionally" work so hard to shoot down (I am just making a "safe assumption") O Ye Hipocrite!

Oh, I mispelled "Hipocrite." It should have been "hypocrite." Oops, sorry! Hang me!

Snow

I safely assume (Oh NO! not "safely assume" again) you love to put down, tear down, cause contention, try to make yourself look good over others, because you get off on that...is that a safe assumption?

I think Goose's comment from Top Gun applies here in your case:

"They were abused children." ha, ha, ha

That's just my safe assumption.

Ok nothing I have said just said about you, just now, is funny. It's mean! It's cruel! It's meant to tear down! It might hurt or upset you. It might make you mad and want to harm me.

Snow

This is your pattern with others. How sad. Why do you feel such need to do this to people? It would be easy for people to take 17 minutes, investigating you, without even leaving LDS.net...and they would see the cruel way you treat, demean, and tear down others. WOW!

I am sad for you. I don't know why you do what you do to people? If anyone is in need of soul searching, as a member of the Church, you might want to start by looking in the mirror.

Matt. 7: 3-5

3 aAnd why beholdest thou the bmote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the cbeam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou ahypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Edited March 24, 2009 by sgrGODSway

[a-train]

I'm confused by something here. What would be the benefit of getting rid of our house? We would still need somewhere to live. We have a mortgage so the sale of the house may not realise much equity and we would have to pay rent for somewhere else for ourselves and our family to live. The rent could often be higher than the mortgage payment so we would end up worse off. In our case if we sold the car it would cost us more to get to church - or we could simply stop going, neither of which would be an advantage. We don't have a boat

As you can probably guess I have a computer but my daughters both need internet access at home for their school and college work. I don't think I'd get much for selling it and that would inconvenience them greatly for their homework.

All of this is relative. Suppose I have 25% of my income each week/month going toward the purchase of new assets (savings). Suppose I have no debts but a mortgage. Suppose my house payment (including taxes and insurance) and the average maintenance on the home totals less than a rental. Then I would see no reason to sell the house or the car or whatever.

Compare that to a family paying a monthly payment twice as high as a decent rental in the area for a home with some heavy maintenance needs. The family spends a lot of extra time working on the home to simply keep it up. They have no savings at all. They recently went into debt to afford extra things which they felt could not be neglected including a major repair to the house. They are doing all of this because the house "is an investment". I would tell this family to sell immediately.

Imagine another family that has been skipping their monthly contributions to savings because of a recent pay reduction. They have a monthly car payment of $600 and they are upside down in the car. I would tell them to sell the car, use some savings to pay off the inequity and buy a cheapy with cash so they can get back to making their contributions to savings.

There is a need for a place to live, for a car to drive, etc. BUT, these things should not get confused with income creating assets.

For a laugh, and to get a better idea of what I'm saying, watch this video of economist and broker Peter Schiff at 2:00 minutes in:

YouTube - Peter Schiff The Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture 13th March 2009 2 of 2

Thinking that a mortgage payment is an investment in an asset is the kind of thinking that has brought this country into some serious trouble. If it doesn't generate income, it is not an asset, regardless of what it is.

Sure, we have to live somewhere. That is part of the cost of living. But we need to understand the difference between an asset and a liability if we are going to be productive.

If it was discovered that moving into a cheaper and smaller place to live would make affordable our child's college education without a student loan, would this be any real sacrifice? Or what if we could live in a cheap rental and save so much that we could buy a house outright in 9 years rather than paying three times as much toward a 30 year mortgage just to move in today? 9 years ago was 2000.

So if it is true that the cheapest place to live is where you are now, I would not recommend moving. I'm not recommending anything personally to you. The topic is God's will concerning our financial prosperity. The short story to that is we must live within our means today if we expect to live comfortably in the future. If we live at our means or beyond our means, we are destined to live beneath our means.

The farmer who each year increases his yield because of capital improvements is wise. He doesn't spend all he makes. He spends a good portion on new irrigation, new equipment, research, better seeds, and so forth. As time passes, he can sell more wheat at a lower price for a greater profit. This is all good for him and his customers. He is a good steward.

The farmer who each year decreases his yield because of capital neglect is unwise. He spends all he makes. His irrigation is in bad shape, his equipment is barely workable, he has not done any new research, his seeds are inferior. As time passes, he has less wheat to sell at a lower and lower profit. This is bad for him and his customers. He is not a good steward.

The latter farmer is killing the goose that lays the golden egg. His talent is hid in the earth, not invested. He yields no increase. He will eventually be out of business and he will lose what he has. It will "be taken away even that which he hath".

It is his greed that is causing the trouble. He doesn't want to save, he doesn't want to go without certain things he has in mind today. He is attached so much to his money, that he won't invest it for fear it will be lost. And yet, it IS lost.

Just as the slothful servant feared losing the talent which he hid in the earth, this poor farmer's fear has made possible the very thing he fears.

Upon being short of money, the poor farmer sells an old tractor to pay off some debt. To him it is a tragedy. He cries and moans for the loss of the old shabby tractor which has sat motionless for some time in disrepair.

The rich farmer sees that his tractor is somewhat outdated and without a word takes it straight to market to sell for to buy a newer better piece of equipment that will enhance his production capabilities. He has no attachment whatsoever to the dead object. He considers it a liability which he is gladly ready to dispose of. However, it will remain productive in the hands of another farmer who has not yet the means to afford the latest technology. It sits not unused or in disrepair.

This can be a difficult thing for many to grasp. We are bombarded with messages that would convince us otherwise. Salesmen constantly try to tell us a liability is an asset.

If it doesn't make us income, it is not an asset. A lot of people will tell us that is a greedy and materialistic way to look at things, but we must ask ourself which servant is greedy. Was it he that hath ten talents, or he that hid his talent in the earth?

-a-train

Edited March 24, 2009 by a-train

[Snow]

yawn:)

Snow

you said:

"safe assumption"

You have made assumptions in this thread as well as in almost all your threads. "Safe assumption(s)"...not really, in my case as well as in the case of all the people you "intentionally" work so hard to shoot down (I am just making a "safe assumption") O Ye Hipocrite!

Oh, I mispelled "Hipocrite." It should have been "hypocrite." Oops, sorry! Hang me!

Snow

I safely assume (Oh NO! not "safely assume" again) you love to put down, tear down, cause contention, try to make yourself look good over others, because you get off on that...is that a safe assumption?

I think Goose's comment from Top Gun applies here in your case:

"They were abused children." ha, ha, ha

That's just my safe assumption.

Ok nothing I have said just said about you, just now, is funny. It's mean! It's cruel! It's meant to tear down! It might hurt or upset you. It might make you mad and want to harm me.

Snow

This is your pattern with others. How sad. Why do you feel such need to do this to people? It would be easy for people to take 17 minutes, investigating you, without even leaving LDS.net...and they would see the cruel way you treat, demean, and tear down others. WOW!

I am sad for you. I don't know why you do what you do to people? If anyone is in need of soul searching, as a member of the Church, you might want to start by looking in the mirror. There seems to be a "beam in your eye."

Trying to change the subject isn't going to fly. Just as I predicted I'll have to challenge you a third time...

1. Have I made any factual mistakes. If so, please demonstrate them. I'll will immediately apologize and correct the error.

2. When are you going to address your plagarism and false representations in your PDF.

Here is a website that outlines plagiarism and acceptable "borrowing" techniques.

How to Avoid Plagiarism

The website includes:

"Direct Quotes: Must include quote marks or be inset and must include a citation"

Unacceptable paraphrasing and acceptable paraphrasing.

Other strategies and words of wisdom on honest writing.

Moreover... you should never pretend that someone else's experiences are your own like you did when you wrote in the first person about a friend of yours and his student - you have no such friend - that was the experience of someone else entirely.

Again... let's see if you have the integrity that members of the Church are expected to have.

Edited March 24, 2009 by Snow

[a-train]

Hey Snow, you need to bring back the scary blinking eye. That will get him for sure. It used to give me nightmares.

-a-train

[sgrGODSway]

and 4th

and 10th

and 20th

and 30th

and 100th

and 1000th

and 10000th

etc...

[Snow]

and 4th

and 10th

and 20th

and 30th

and 100th

and 1000th

and 10000th

etc...

Meaning that will continue to avoid the issue of plagiarism and false claims in your PDF all the while telling us that God can help you get rich by following his laws.

Okay - here's the 4th challenge, or maybe you can tell us why you plagiarize or why you are afraid to own up to it and correct it?

Or let me put it this way... what is your position on this whole thing:

Do you believe that it is compatible to plagiarize and make false claims in the first person while promoting a system that is supposed to comply with God's law?

or

Do you believe that plagiarism does not apply to you?

or

Do you believe that the website is in error about plagiarism?

or

Do you intend to apologize and correct your errors?

This is a serious question - how do you view it all?

Edited March 24, 2009 by Snow

[a-train]

AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are killing me Snow!

-a-train

[Snow]

AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are killing me Snow!

-a-train

As always, I am here to serve... and protect. Mostly serving, but a little bit of protecting on the side.

[a-train]

sgrGODSway,

Can you give me a brief statement that would encapsulate your philosophy of "getting rich God's way"? I see you mentioned The Secret. Supposed I'd like to have $1 million, am I simply to ask God for $1 million and go out spending as if the money is on the way? Do I just tell people I am completely certain I have $1 million coming? Are you saying the Law of Attraction is real, but the "universe" is God? What is your philosophy and how is it to be implemented?

-a-train

[a-train]

As always, I am here to serve... and protect. Mostly serving, but a little bit of protecting on the side.

What is freaky is that after the blink the pupil contracts like it is focusing a ray of evil energy into your soul.

Sheesh, I gotta start thinking positively!

-a-train

[WillowTheWhisp]

What is freaky is that after the blink the pupil contracts like it is focusing a ray of evil energy into your soul.

That's just a normal eye reaction. A pupil dilates when there is less light in order to allow more light in - when the eyelid closes there is less light and so the pupil dilates.The dilated pupil is apparent when the eye opens, but then more light is coming in so it contracts. All this happens very quickly in a blink.

On the subject of a house being an assett or a liability. At my age it is an assett because in a few years time the mortgage will be paid off and there will be no more outgoings in that respect. If I'd been renting all ths time it would have been money wasted and I will still have to be paying out the rent in my old age when I could do to have fewer outgoings. There is no guarantee with pension incomes now so we need to be trying to reduce our future outgoings at the time when our income will be less. When we are not as fit we will need other people to do repair work and we will need to pay them, so we save that kind of money now by doing what we can ourselves.

Ona different note - this 'positive thinking' idea. I don't see it as acting like we have things we don't have so much as planning to have them. For instance a couple of years ago my husband was talking about emmigrating. Friends of ours were also talking about emmigrating. My husband's was more of a pipe dream but our friends looked into property prices abroad, work prospects, emmigration information and now they live in France in an old property they are renovating and the family has a much healthier lifestyle. We are still here. Isn't it all about believing? Our friends belived they coukld do it. My husband just thought "wouldn't it be nice if....."

Jesus tells us , "anything you ask of the Father in my name, believing, ye shall receive."

[rameumptom]

In the sermon on the mount Jesus said (as you so rightly quoted) "Blessed are the poor in spirit." He didn't say "Blessed are the poor."

As for 'the Protestant Gospel of Wealth' - what the heck is that? I've heard of the Protestant work ethic but never the Protestant gospel of wealth.

Concerning the poor in spirit issue, fair enough. Shall I give better examples? How about ye cannot serve God and Mammon (riches)? How about Jesus stating, after the rich young man departed, that it is very difficult for the rich to enter into the kingdom of heaven? There are many others.

I agree that it is the love of money, not just money that is bad. Items are neither good nor bad. It is how man uses them that determines their intrinsic and spiritual value.

The Gospel of Wealth is a Protestant notion that appeared about 30 years ago, and has been gaining strength. It is that if you believe enough, God will make you rich. Very popular amongst televangelists. But it is exactly this concept that created destruction amongst the Nephites. Getting gain was the war cry of the Gadianton Robbers, who made their oaths in the name of God. The Gadianton governor, Giddianhi, explained in an epistle to Lachoneus that his secret society was good! They think they are doing well, because God is on their side!

I see too many LDS members today, who are getting sucked into this concept.

Instead, the gospel teaches us that we are to FIRST seek the kingdom of God and his righteousness. And THEN if we are interested, we can seek riches. But those riches are not to improve our lifestyle, but to build and establish Zion and the Kingdom of God upon the earth. I see too many members seeking to get gain through get rich quick schemes. Why else is Utah at the top of such schemes, as MLM promoters try to convince their ward members that their product and process are based upon the gospel? No, they aren’t. That is the gospel of wealth at work: greed wrapped up in a scripture cover.

Connie quoted Nibley as stating the lunch is free. I agree, but only when we receive the lunch in the proper manner. We must receive the gift as offered, and not attempt to steal others’ free lunches. Nibley also warned about excessive use and misuse of earth’s materials, instead of as stewards. He even condemned his own grandfather, Charles Nibley (Bishop of the Church under Joseph F Smith) for his chopping down all of his old wood forests on his lands, to make a quick dollar. He also condemned him for other decisions. Bishop Nibley was sent to the east to get loans to build the Hotel Utah (now Joseph Smith Memorial Bldg). He returned with the loan, but it had to be repaid within 3 years (IIRC) of its opening. Pres Smith asked him how the Church could ever do that. Bishop Nibley told him they could build a bar in the basement, and easily repay the loan. Pres Smith hit the ceiling, but had no choice. And so for the first few years of its existence, the Hotel Utah had a bar and lounge in its basement.

We are to be stewards of any and all that God gives us. We are not to be rich. If God gives us wealth, it is not for US, but for us to benefit mankind. Otherwise, we will be like the rich man, who used his wealth on himself, rather than help the poor Lazarus.

Edited March 24, 2009 by rameumptom

[Connie]

12. Your PDF - as we both know - is dishonest - it promotes a falsehood as evidence that your get-rich method works. You claim in it that you have a friend that taught your method to a student who then used it to get a rug and stove and bay widow for his house.

That's completely untrue - Why won't you admit that you plagiarized it from another book and you have no such friend?

Substation:

From the posters PDF (which you can get from him via email):

“A friend of mine, who teaches the Laws that govern the acquisition of Prosperity

and Abundance, told me how he worked with one of his students. He told his

student that the student must get in mind a clear picture of the thing he desired,

so that the creative thought might be impressed on formless substance. This

student was a very poor man, living in a rented house, and having only what he

earned from day to day. The student couldn't grasp the fact that all wealth was

his. After thinking things over he decided he might reasonably ask for a new rug

for the floor of his best room and an anthracite coal stove to heat the house

during the cold winter. Following the instruction from my friend, and those

instructions are the same as those also contained in this book, he obtained these

two things within a few months. When that happened, it dawned on the man that

he had not asked for enough. He then went through his house and planned all the

improvements he would like to make in the house. He added a bay window here

and added on a room there, until it was as complete in his mind as his ideal

home.”

Now: Go to the real book from which sgrGODSway plagarized his PDF. The same passage it lifted (with only a few word changes) from page 61. You can find the book on Google Books. Here’s a link:

The Science of Getting Rich - Google Book Search

Four out of four passages I checked were plagiarized.

Thank you. That's all i was looking for. I had figured out the others on my own.

p.s. That eye is pretty creepy.

[a-train]

Bishop Nibley told him they could build a bar in the basement, and easily repay the loan. Pres Smith hit the ceiling, but had no choice. And so for the first few years of its existence, the Hotel Utah had a bar and lounge in its basement.

And Joseph Smith owned a bar in Nauvoo.

It should be understood that the 'there is no free lunch' concept is used among economists. The term actually started in the late 19th century when bars started offering free lunches with the purchase of a drink. The idea was to entice people to come in and buy liquor. The saloon owner was betting that one drink would lead to two and so on. Therefore he hoped to pay for the lunch and make a nice profit with liquor sales. The saying therefore resulted: "there is no free lunch". Economists later used this 'no free lunch' phrase to describe the limitations expressed by a production possibilities curve. This use was widely known to be utilized by Milton Freidman. However, it was strictly for that purpose.

Friedman actually said there IS a free lunch! However, not in terms of production possibilities, but in terms of externalities.

YouTube - Milton Friedman -Externalities - There Is A Free Lunch.avi

Nibley's book (Approaching Zion) is great. I love it. I once had someone throw it in my face claiming that it advocates state socialism. In the book, Nibley says that "there's no free lunch" is a lie from the devil. He points out that all things are free from God. Some took this to be a slap in the face of free-market economists (capitalists). But this does not in any way offend them. In fact, many if not most free-market capitalists are strict believers that all resources come freely to man from the Creator.

-a-train

Edited March 25, 2009 by a-train

[Hemidakota]

So remarkable it's worth saying twice.

Now that is a scary avatar!