Church's new City Creek Mall Plaza Complex commercial on TV

[Inspirecaptain of 50]

Not sure this one is hanging on a building:

protect it.jpg (120.95 KiB) Viewed 397 times

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

This is where you and I part ways, Col...this goes beyond asking "WHY?" - this is openly declaring that this COULD NOT have been an inspired decision, (as clearly the Lord is NOT going to have to apologize to anyone, so you are declaring the other side of your if....then statement true. So much for no more evil speaking of the Lord's anointed

O.I., you know me better than that. Have I unequivocally stated that this was definitely NOT an inspired undertaking? No, in fact, in a few previous posts of mine, you'll see where I've said 'if' on a few occasions, so please do not put words into my mouth. And evil speaking of the Lord's annointed? Please. Heaven forbid any of us should express concerns about how the church just used $5 billion for a luxurious, fanciful shopping mall for the more well-to-do. I am surprised at how quick you are to cast judgment on someone so quickly for expressing alarm and asking questions over something like this - you're better than that. And please... tell me I'm dead wrong for equating the construction of the complex with these scriptures...

Mormon 8:37 - For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.

Ezek. 34: 8 - As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock

1 Nephi. 13: 7-8 - And I also saw gold, and silver, and silks, and scarlets, and fine-twined linen, and all manner of precious clothing; and I saw many harlots; and the angel spake unto me, saying: Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church.”

2 Nephi. 28: 13 (9-16) - They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

Classic. Am I going to see you and the family on conference Sunday holding up home made signs that you and the kids made during your FHE activity this Monday all pacing in front of the conference center and bullhorning with Aussie at your side calling the prophets to repentance for the church's wasteful spending habits my friend.

Classic is right. Mark, all I am concerned about is that the church's corporate arm has taken over the religious aspect of it and for you and others to call me out because I am of the opinion that $5 billion could have probably been better spent helping accomplish the 4-fold mission of the church (especially helping the needy) is pretty revealing - guess you'd rather have $5 billion spent so that those who are more well-to-do can be wined, dined and showered with materialism and all manner of lavishness instead of helping the needy. The church just added 'helping the needy' to its 3-fold mission statement to make it 4-fold... I'm sure spending $5 billion for a great and spacious endeavor for wealthier shoppers is helping to reinforce that commitment. Save the patronization for the self-righteous, haughty and apostate.

[ATL Wakecaptain of 1,000]

What was that darned principle of common consent again?

[jnjnelsoncaptain of 100]

Those BofM scriptures cited which mention fine sanctuaries, costly clothes, scorning the poor,

Nephi and Mormon were not speaking to Babylon, their audience is the readers of the BOM. Let's be very clear, 2 Nephi 28 is directed to us. Mormon was speaking to us. If you miss that, you miss most of the BOM.

Let's be even more clear and actually discuss the wording of the scriptures in question, shall we?

Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; and their works shall be in the dark.

And the blood of the saints shall cry from the ground against them.

Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.

Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.

They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.

They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.

Nowhere in this passage does it condemn "fine sancuaries" or "fine clothing". What this passage condemns is robbing and persecuting the poor and being puffed up in pride. Someone who is puffed up in pride will find any convenient reason to be prideful; someone who robs the poor will find any avenue available to rob the poor.

This isn't to say that the Church of Jesus Christ is somehow immune or exempt from these prophecies. Pride is something each of should not allow to take root in our hearts.

For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.

38 O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world?

39 Why do ye adorn yourselves with that which hath no life, and yet suffer the hungry, and the needy, and the naked, and the sick and the afflicted to pass by you, and notice them not?

This passage is not condemnation of money, nor condemnation of substance, fine apparel, adorning of churches, etc. This passage is a condemnation of loving those things more than loving people who need our help. I might be able to find some fault in building up many of these fine buildings if it was demonstrated that the people who were building them were in fact suffering "the hungry, and the needy, and the naked, and the sick and the afflicted to pass by" without being noticed. However, the poor are not being neglected in any way. Must someone forgo material prosperity in order to help the poor? I reject any such sentiment. It is through material prosperity that it is possible to help the poor, as articulated by another Book of Mormon prophet:

And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to do good—to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted.

Unless I am mistaken, part of any successful shopping mall include a large portion of clothing stores and places to purchase food ("to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry"). This shopping mall is merely a tool. The method in which it is used depends largely on the choices of those who shop there.

[AussieOicaptain of 1,000]

Col. Flagg says 3 billion, Reese says 4 billion and KSL reports it's 1.5 billion. We can't even get the numbers right!

Anyway, it's probably no surprise that I disagree with schitzo man Col. Flagg (from MASH) and Reese.
Here's how I see it-
One of the for-profit corps of the church spent a lot of money buying up land around the Temple and church headquarters and built some well constructed buildings to go there which they then leased out to a partner who then subleases to stores. The church then collects rent on those buildings to help recoup it's investment while the church waits for all hell to break loose. Once that happens and all the stores close (which they will!!) the church is left with a huge property it can use for it's own purposes which in the millennium would consist of redeeming the dead etc. I think it's genius and shows the foresight of our leaders regarding future events and just how near those events are. But that's my opinion! I don't see it as a shopping mall for long.

or they could have just ensured it was to be parklands for perpetuity

4pages in 1 day speaks volumes for what we all think- even those trying to find an angle to justify it

my guess is this is one of those spacious buildings that will burn with the rubble

FWIW this place only generates a return if its tenants make profit. profit in these places comes from stores charging exhorbitant prices

i wonder how the church would have been recognised if it funded billions in micro-lending for women in 3rd world countries,and so on.

[jnjnelsoncaptain of 100]

What was that darned principle of common consent again?

Fortunately, it is the principle of common consent, not the principle of unanimous consent.

[jnjnelsoncaptain of 100]

And please... tell me I'm dead wrong for equating the construction of the complex with these scriptures...

Col. Flagg, you are dead wrong when you equate the construction of the complex with the scriptures you cited. You're welcome.

[AussieOicaptain of 1,000]

For all those complaining about how the money used for the City Creek complex should have been used elsewhere:

Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, which should betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? (Jn 12:3-5)

Beware of the company you keep when making such statements. You should be less worried about what the brethren are doing with the finances in their stewardship and more worried about what you are doing with the finances in your own.

I have no idea what the purpose of the complex is.....but it could be as simple as the Lord desiring to test who will murmur and who won't. In the past the Lord has tested his followers by asking them to suffer bondage, wander the wilderness, cross plains, and march on a dead end military expedition (Zion's camp). If a shopping mall is the toughest test I have to pass then I will consider myself lucky.

sigh. here we go again.a test. yeah.thats what god does. withholds charity from the needy to blow the money on an edifice so as to test the worthiness of those who contributed the money in the first place. im sorry i dont buy it.

pulling that scripture IS valid in the discussion on the conference centre. certainly if the lord wants a $320m conference centre he can have it. it is HIS money

but lets not kid ourselves. this is buying a fancy rug for the floor of the house next door.

if he wanted a multi billion dollar building dedicated to mammon,fine. it just means my understanding of who he is and what his message is, is different than his. for some here that is the best they can cling to,along with such sad comments like "its not my area of stewardship I won't comment". sorry, this is a LAY ministry church. we ALL serve, we ALL work.

it is the LORDS church,not a church of a few privileged people with consistent surnames

[ATL Wakecaptain of 1,000]

Those BofM scriptures cited which mention fine sanctuaries, costly clothes, scorning the poor,

Nephi and Mormon were not speaking to Babylon, their audience is the readers of the BOM. Let's be very clear, 2 Nephi 28 is directed to us. Mormon was speaking to us. If you miss that, you miss most of the BOM.

Let's be even more clear and actually discuss the wording of the scriptures in question, shall we?

Sorry, I accidentally cut off the part of the quote that prompted my response.

Those BofM scriptures cited which mention fine sanctuaries, costly clothes, scorning the poor, etc ALSO apply even more so to the American people and Western Christianity - in fact more so.

In trying to apply this scripture, I just want to avoid changing its meaning by applying it to the wrong audience.

jnjnelson, I actually think what you say sounds very reasonable.

However, having the CHURCH build a mall just feels wrong to me. It doesn't feel like Zion and LOOKS a lot like Babylon. But I don't know. It just feels wrong. I have no problem with malls. I have no problem with commerce. But why does the institution that is suppose to be providing spiritual nutrition offering temporal nutrition?

Better said, isn't the Melchezidek priesthood responsible for spiritual matters and the Aaronic Priesthood suppose to see to temporal matters? That being said, what was the President of the Church (and any other apostles) doing there? I guess one could make an argument that the Presiding Bishop could oversee this. But I just don't see Nephi, Jacob, Alma, King Benjamin, Paul, Peter, Mormon, Nephi, Abraham, or any other prophet caring about building a mall. I don't see Moroni, Adam, or Isaiah standing next to the billboards used to advertise for the Center. The prophets teach repentance and point to Christ. Sorry, I just don't see it.

[ATL Wakecaptain of 1,000]

What was that darned principle of common consent again?

Fortunately, it is the principle of common consent, not the principle of unanimous consent.

My point is, if there is not unanimous consent, as you correctly note, then it is okay to have a difference of opinion and it's also okay for some to not consent to this project.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

Let's go back to 1999 for a moment...



What did the tornado hit or damage during its brief existence?

1. The outdoor retailers summer market (many men in the church make the outdoors a second religion and hunt for sport)
2. Gay bars (no explanation needed there)
3. The Delta Center (many Saints also make basketball a religion and have been known to attend playoff games on Sunday)
4. Hotels (many Hotels in Salt Lake offer porn)
5. Restaurants (fine dining)
6. State government offices (no explanation needed there)
7. The new LDS conference center (was undergoing construction at the time - some consider it to be a 'great and spacious building')
8. The Avenues (ritzy part of Salt Lake where the rich live, including many GA's)

Of those 8, what does the new City Creek Center offer? Retail shopping, alcohol, expensive lodging, fancy eateries, a highly expensive complex constructed by the church (just like the conference center was) and you could say it's also 'ritzy'. Quite interesting. Was this tornado just a freak, random act of nature... or something more? I think that answer is obvious.

[ATL Wakecaptain of 1,000]

Unless I am mistaken, part of any successful shopping mall include a large portion of clothing stores and places to purchase food ("to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry"). This shopping mall is merely a tool. The method in which it is used depends largely on the choices of those who shop there.

The City Creek Center will not be clothing the naked or feeding the hungry. The naked and hungry do not shop at Coach, Nordstroms, Tiffany's, Porsche, Rolex, or Texas de Brazil.

Go to their website and see how many times they use the words "luxury" and "fine quality".
http://www.shopcitycreekcenter.com/shopping

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

FWIW this place only generates a return if its tenants make profit.Profit in these places comes from stores charging exhorbitant prices

I haven't even gotten to that point yet - thanks for mentioning it Auss. Most of the retail businesses in this complex offer merchandise at exorbitant prices (as Aussie stated) - I'm sure the average person can't wait to walk in there and drop $50 for a turtle neck shirt or $100 for a pair of shoes.

[jnjnelsoncaptain of 100]

What was that darned principle of common consent again?

Fortunately, it is the principle of common consent, not the principle of unanimous consent.

My point is, if there is not unanimous consent, as you correctly note, then it is okay to have a difference of opinion and it's also okay for some to not consent to this project.

Yes, it is okay, because the Lord's work and the Lord's methods will continue to progress and succeed without the help of those who dissent from His work and are opposed to His methods.

[jnjnelsoncaptain of 100]

…But why does the institution that is suppose to be providing spiritual nutrition offering temporal nutrition?

Better said, isn't the Melchezidek priesthood responsible for spiritual matters and the Aaronic Priesthood suppose to see to temporal matters?…

And why is the presiding High Priest in each of the wards of the Lord's church primarily responsible for assigning the resources of the bishop's storehouses?

[Markcaptain of 1,000]

This is where you and I part ways, Col...this goes beyond asking "WHY?" - this is openly declaring that this COULD NOT have been an inspired decision, (as clearly the Lord is NOT going to have to apologize to anyone, so you are declaring the other side of your if....then statement true. So much for no more evil speaking of the Lord's anointed

O.I., you know me better than that. Have I unequivocally stated that this was definitely NOT an inspired undertaking? No, in fact, in a few previous posts of mine, you'll see where I've said 'if' on a few occasions, so please do not put words into my mouth. And evil speaking of the Lord's annointed? Please. Heaven forbid any of us should express concerns about how the church just used $5 billion for a luxurious, fanciful shopping mall for the more well-to-do. I am surprised at how quick you are to cast judgment on someone so quickly for expressing alarm and asking questions over something like this - you're better than that. And please... tell me I'm dead wrong for equating the construction of the complex with these scriptures...

Mormon 8:37 - For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.

Ezek. 34: 8 - As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock

1 Nephi. 13: 7-8 - And I also saw gold, and silver, and silks, and scarlets, and fine-twined linen, and all manner of precious clothing; and I saw many harlots; and the angel spake unto me, saying: Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church.”

2 Nephi. 28: 13 (9-16) - They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.

Okay my friend I will tell you that you are dead wrong. Your presumptuous innuendo in dishing out condemnation of the leaders of the church as complicit in robbing the poor and persecuting the meek and assisting in the building up of the great and abominable church of the devil because of their decisions to build this complex is so far off the deep end that I don't even know where to begin. You are actually assigning blame to the Church of Jesus Christ and its leaders for the neglect and suffering of the poor and needy because they built City Creek? Seriously Bro. you need a serious reality check here. If you don't see the danger in your attitudes you are either totally stupid or completely naive as to where this will eventually take you. I am dumbfounded that you do not see this for what it is; speaking ill of the Lords restored church and its current leadership. Wowzer.

[moving2zioncaptain of 100]

Just thinking and I haven't seen anything posted in here along this line of thought- But what about all of the folks that see a major financial crash coming. Their have been several prophecies to the effect. Someone in church headquarters could have had the fore sight to pump the cash into an area that is solid and can return the investment to the church. When paper is worthless and the government confiscates your digits like they just did last week to the catholic church, then it would behoove us all to have less in the bank where the feds can take it away. I see this as the presiding bishop has wisely placed the funds into hard assets. It will bring in income during hard times and the church will have future steady financial resources to bless the lives of the saints throughout the world.

[Alighiericaptain of 10]

I find the murmuring against the Brethren in this Post really quite shocking. Didn't you go to Priesthood last Sunday? Do you remember what the lesson was on? It was on sustaining your priesthood leaders. I think some rereading of last week's lesson is in order. It is really timely that that specific lesson comes up when some are having trouble seeing the Lord's wisdom behind the projects the Brethren initiate. I have been a casual reader of this forum for about a year, and quite frankly nothing has gotten me more fired up than to see good people starting to question the decisions the Brethren are making. George Albert Smith said, "The Adversary has not forgotten them [the Brethren], and one of the evidences to me of the divinity of the calling of these men is that evil men speak evil of them, and good men and good women speak well of them."

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/c ... talization

This is the URL to the Church's website. Read the article and read what Apostle's and a BIshop with keys have said of this project.
Read what Bishop Burton said about the benefits coming from this project.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

Okay my friend I will tell you that you are dead wrong. Your presumptuous innuendo in dishing out condemnation of the leaders of the church as complicit in robbing the poor and persecuting the meek and assisting in the building up of the great and abominable church of the devil because of their decisions to build this complex is so far off the deep end that I don't even know where to begin. You are actually assigning blame to the Church of Jesus Christ and its leaders for the neglect and suffering of the poor and needy because they built City Creek? Seriously Bro. you need a serious reality check here. If you don't see the danger in your attitudes you are either totally stupid or completely naive as to where this will eventually take you. I am dumbfounded that you do not see this for what it is; speaking ill of the Lords restored church and its current leadership. Wowzer.

I'm sorry for the way I feel about this Mark, I really am, but in all honesty... $5 billion... for a luxury mall? Really? There aren't more noble, Christ-like and generous ways to use $5 billion, especially during a time when many are without work, under-employed, struggling, hungry, without shelter, etc.? $5 billion ain't chump change - that's $250 for every church member on earth (all 12 million of us)... for Macy's, Nordstroms, Tiffany's, etc., retail establishments that charge an arm and a leg for their merchandise? I'm sticking by my concerns here and I hope they aren't justified, I really do, however, what happens if my concerns are unfounded? Nothing. What happens if they are? Then I think what I posted above RE the 1999 tornado that hit downtown Salt Lake City might have just been a warm-up of things to come. And... why do you think Salt Lake City has been prophesied by former prophets to be classed as one of the most wicked cities in the last days? I'll tell you right now it has nothing to do with drive-by shootings, gang activity, murder or crime. Just sayin' 'bro'.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

Just thinking and I haven't seen anything posted in here along this line of thought- But what about all of the folks that see a major financial crash coming. Their have been several prophecies to the effect. Someone in church headquarters could have had the fore sight to pump the cash into an area that is solid and can return the investment to the church. When paper is worthless and the government confiscates your digits like they just did last week to the catholic church, then it would behoove us all to have less in the bank where the feds can take it away. I see this as the presiding bishop has wisely placed the funds into hard assets. It will bring in income during hard times and the church will have future steady financial resources to bless the lives of the saints throughout the world.

Maybe - and like I've said... I won't cross the line and say this was an uninspired undertaking that was based on greed, image and worldly opinion, but it sure isn't something you'd expect our church to do when at the same time they're advising us as members to get out of debt, be thrifty, live modestly, help the poor and needy, to avoid materialism and vanity and to live within your means (many of the retail establishments are going to tempt people to make purchases on credit).

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1991/02/i-hav ... ery=vanity

What is the condemnation we are under that President Benson speaks of regarding the Book of Mormon?

Robert E. Parsons, associate professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University and stake patriarch in the Orem Utah East Stake. In the April 1986 general conference, President Benson made two now oft-quoted statements: “Unless we read the Book of Mormon and give heed to its teachings, the Lord has stated in section 84 of the Doctrine and Covenants that the whole Church is under condemnation” and “In our day, the Lord has revealed the need to reemphasize the Book of Mormon to get the Church and all the children of Zion out from under condemnation—the scourge and judgment.” (Ensign, May 1986, pp. 5, 78.) Many members have wondered what that condemnation is.

It might be well to fix in our minds the meaning of the word condemnation. To be condemned is to be found guilty. It also means to be found unfit for service. It is interesting to note that a major teaching of the Book of Mormon is how we might be found “guiltless” before God when Christ stands to judge the world (3 Ne. 27:16) and how we might be fit servants in his kingdom (Mosiah 2:16–21).

A careful examination of the verses President Benson referred to in section 84 provides added insight for the thoughtful reader:

“And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—

“Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

“And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

“And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written.” (D&C 84:54–57.)

As we read these verses and ask ourselves why we, as members of the Church, are under condemnation, certain words stand out—unbelief, treated lightly, vanity. What have we not believed? What have we treated lightly? What is our vanity?

Vanity - the excessive belief in one's own abilities or attractiveness to others; self-idolatry; rejecting God for the sake of one's own image; excessive pride in one's appearance, qualities, abilities, achievements, etc.; lacking real value; hollowness; worthlessness: the vanity of a selfish life; something worthless, trivial, or pointless.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

http://www.lds.org/ensign/2000/10/faces ... ery=vanity

Costly apparel, class distinctions, and contention are only three of the many elements of pride found in the Book of Mormon that relate to our day.

Costly Apparel

Nephi identified the great and spacious building which his father saw in a dream to be the “vain imaginations and the pride of the children of men” (1 Ne. 12:18). He told us that pride and vanity are inseparably connected to this great building with no foundation.

Nephi’s younger brother Jacob chastised the Nephites for their vanity by saying, “Ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel” (Jacob 2:13). Jacob was not criticizing well-intentioned efforts to dress neatly but instead the haughty attitudes of those who become puffed up because of riches. He implied that pride based on outward appearance created a rationalization which allowed the Nephites to persecute their brethren “because ye suppose that ye are better than they” (Jacob 2:13).

In our day the costly apparel syndrome is identified by the term conspicuous consumption. The word conspicuous alludes to the visual side of vanity, the need to be seen or to be recognized. Consumption refers to that which we take in or that which we digest. Conspicuous consumption may be defined as that which we take to ourselves or that which becomes ours as motivated by the visual opinions of our society. By its very definition, the person trapped by conspicuous consumption may be focused on the opinions of others because what is “in” today may be “out” tomorrow. Vanity then becomes its own punishment because there is never time to be satisfied, because the eyes and opinions of others can turn so quickly to embrace someone else. This person must have a “great and spacious” wardrobe that gives a wide variety of choices for today while at the same time giving room to expand in anticipation of tomorrow’s change in fashion in order to prevent the judgment of wearing something out of style.

For us, the disease which encompassed the Zoramites takes on more than clothing; it can include cars, houses, boats, diplomas, and anything else that has a foundation in which the need for the approval of others carries more weight than the need to be accepted by God. President Benson referred to this problem in general conference four decades ago: “Are not many of us status-seekers—measuring the worth of a man by the size of his bank account, his house, his automobile? … This is a sad commentary on a civilization that has given to mankind the greatest achievement and progress ever known. But it is an even sadder commentary on those of us who call ourselves Christians, who thus betray the ideals given to us by the Son of God himself.

[paper facecaptain of 100]

The advertising on billboards for the new mall here in Salt Lake appeals to the natural man.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

So the LDS are the Gentiles saying "a bible a bible we don't need any more bible"

[paper facecaptain of 100]

So the LDS are the Gentiles saying "a bible a bible we don't need any more bible"

Terryl Givens in his book By The Hand of Mormon cites a study that shows that the Book of Mormon was only cited in about 6% of General Conference talks before ETB's "flood the earth" talk in 1988.

If the condemnation from Section 84 has never been lifted then we are still under it. Even now the Church touts the fact that we believe in the Bible first and the Book of Mormon is always mentioned second, as if it's the red headed step-child.

[Squallycaptain of 1,000]

.

[Squallycaptain of 1,000]

Those BofM scriptures cited which mention fine sanctuaries, costly clothes, scorning the poor,

Nephi and Mormon were not speaking to Babylon, their audience is the readers of the BOM. Let's be very clear, 2 Nephi 28 is directed to us. Mormon was speaking to us. If you miss that, you miss most of the BOM.

+100

I agree ATL. I guess i find it interesting how people do not see who the BOM was written for? The warnings are for those who read them and are under covenant to follow the Lord. The condemnation is lifted when we actually start believing and seeking what the Book of Mormon teaches instead of casting it aside. We need to stop assuming it is a warning to "other" people while we tell each other that we are so blessed, priviledged, and more righteous. We need to cast off our pride and vanity. Not build it up.

[patriotsaintcaptain of 1,000]

sigh. here we go again.a test. yeah.thats what god does. withholds charity from the needy to blow the money on an edifice so as to test the worthiness of those who contributed the money in the first place. im sorry i dont buy it.

pulling that scripture IS valid in the discussion on the conference centre. certainly if the lord wants a $320m conference centre he can have it. it is HIS money

but lets not kid ourselves. this is buying a fancy rug for the floor of the house next door.

if he wanted a multi billion dollar building dedicated to mammon,fine. it just means my understanding of who he is and what his message is, is different than his. for some here that is the best they can cling to,along with such sad comments like "its not my area of stewardship I won't comment". sorry, this is a LAY ministry church. we ALL serve, we ALL work.

it is the LORDS church,not a church of a few privileged people with consistent surnames

Read my post before commenting Aussie. I said I don't know why the mall was built, but that it may be a test for some of the saints. It apparently is a test for you and others on this thread who can't resist criticizing.

Also your notion that because we all serve and all work, we have the right to judge those outside our stewardship is nonsense and has no basis in scripture. You remember the whole beam and mote idea? Or the whole, "he who is without sin cast the first stone" idea? If you don't like the Savior's teaching on the subject maybe the words of Joseph Smith will strike a chord?

If you do not accuse each other, God will not accuse you. If you have no accuser you will enter heaven, and if you will follow the revelations and instructions which God gives you through me, I will take you into heaven as my back load. If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you. If you will throw a cloak of charity over my sins, I will over yours—for charity covereth a multitude of sins.
(History of the Church, 4:445).

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

sigh. here we go again.a test. yeah.thats what god does. withholds charity from the needy to blow the money on an edifice so as to test the worthiness of those who contributed the money in the first place. im sorry i dont buy it.

pulling that scripture IS valid in the discussion on the conference centre. certainly if the lord wants a $320m conference centre he can have it. it is HIS money

but lets not kid ourselves. this is buying a fancy rug for the floor of the house next door.

if he wanted a multi billion dollar building dedicated to mammon,fine. it just means my understanding of who he is and what his message is, is different than his. for some here that is the best they can cling to,along with such sad comments like "its not my area of stewardship I won't comment". sorry, this is a LAY ministry church. we ALL serve, we ALL work.

it is the LORDS church,not a church of a few privileged people with consistent surnames

Read my post before commenting Aussie. I said I don't know why the mall was built, but that it may be a test for some of the saints. It apparently is a test for you and others on this thread who can't resist criticizing.

Also your notion that because we all serve and all work, we have the right to judge those outside our stewardship is nonsense and has no basis in scripture. You remember the whole beam and mote idea? Or the whole, "he who is without sin cast the first stone" idea? If you don't like the Savior's teaching on the subject maybe the words of Joseph Smith will strike a chord?

If you do not accuse each other, God will not accuse you. If you have no accuser you will enter heaven, and if you will follow the revelations and instructions which God gives you through me, I will take you into heaven as my back load. If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you. If you will throw a cloak of charity over my sins, I will over yours—for charity covereth a multitude of sins.
(History of the Church, 4:445).