No Paid Ministry

[Obrien]

I'm not sure why the GA's don't consider themselves paid clergy, but I'll have faith that they have their good reasons. Perhaps it's because most of the counseling of members is done at the Ward and Stake levels these days and a lot of the Apostles time is now spent on administration tasks, oversight of programs and organizations within the Church, attending functions and meetings, and public relations, and corporate work, just to name a few.

Matthew 25:15
The question it seems is whether or not apostles should be in charge of talents from their master or more occupied with salvation of souls.

I bet the Apostles wish they could devote more time to teaching and testifying than to oversight and administration, but they are stuck in a telestial world too and subject to limitations placed on them by others who may not share their concerns.

There's nothing stopping them from "teaching and testifying", other than a lack of relevant information / experience to teach / testify of...

[Col. Flagg]

Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

[Obrien]

This from the guy who no longer attends the LDS church and most likely doesn't pay a red cent of tithing or fast offerings to help the church anymore with anything. Go lecture your remnant folks with all your pious attitudes Tex. Your bias against all things LDS is deafening.. 8-|

When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amen. If someone doesn't like the way the church operates they are under no obligation to support it either financially or in their labors. That is their choice. Nobody is twisting their arm. Just be classy enough to not insult or degrade or run down the LDS church or its leaders because you don't happen to agree with them. I would NEVER go on another faiths discussion group comprised mostly of members of that faith and run down their church leveling insults and corrections to those who are faithful followers of that particular church. That would just be classless. Yet on this site it happens constantly. Shots and insults are taken at all things LDS on about every thread discussing the LDS church. Some people need a lesson in manners and civility. [-(

Sure.. you never level insults or correction at those you disagree with... ;) I am not going to another faith's discussion group because I am not of another faith. I'm LDS, and it's just as much my church as yours. I have just as much right to promote my ideas here as you do you, as long as we do so within the forum rules and Brian's interpretation thereof. You just have a hard time understanding that someone could disagree with you.

[jbalm]

The whole idea of a leader getting a revelation that he's to be supported by the membership is sketchy anyway. I would have questioned it then. Perhaps he received according to the idol in his heart. (Eze 14) and a little prodding from Rigdon.

The BoM lays out the correct principle imo and I have no problem defending it.

This from the guy who no longer attends the LDS church and most likely doesn't pay a red cent of tithing or fast offerings to help the church anymore with anything. Go lecture your remnant folks with all your pious attitudes Tex. Your bias against all things LDS is deafening.. 8-|

When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

I am not, nor have I ever been a "remnant person." Ask any of the remnant people. I never bought into it.

But I am appalled by the LDS hypocrisy. The church sends out around 80,000 kids at a time to knock on people's doors throughout the world and as them to question their current beliefs. Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church.

Like my son said, on his mission..."why does the Church expect everyone to be open minded about the Church, but expect Church members to be so closed minded about everything else?"

When missionaries are directed to knock only on hardcore LDS doors, then maybe I'll feel obligated to keep my thoughts to myself.

[Finrock]

If you complain/murmur about the church and leaders, you are not biased...

If you believe and have a testimony that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only true and living church upon the earth, that Christ leads his Church, and that Christ selects His leaders and has given them the Priesthood and keys to operate the Church, then you are biased...

This is a murmuring/complaining thread, by the Reds who only want to complain. No one has responded to the questions I asked.

Finrock has an obsession about leaders being evil.

Amonhi has several different people who post for him. One Amonhi decided to send George to the telestial kingdom because George did not agree with Amonhi. It looks like the nicer Amonhi is in this thread, but still having issues on the truth.

When I said biased, I ment completely to the point that if you are for the church you can see no bad or if you are against the church you can see no good.

An honest person will see both good and bad in the church because both exist. A dishonest person will only see one or the other.

It is true that several people post for me.

Peace,
Amonhi

Amonhi,

What do you mean that "It is true that several people post for me?"

I understood it to mean that you had people on the forum who were speaking for you or defending you. For instance, I've been accused of being your "puppy" and in that way I might have been posting for you. Is that what you mean, or do you mean that there are several people who are using the Amonhi account and so behind the keyboard a different individual could be posting at any given time? Meaning, that Amonhi isn't just one person, but several people taking turns posting?

-Finrock

[eddie]

When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amen. If someone doesn't like the way the church operates they are under no obligation to support it either financially or in their labors. That is their choice. Nobody is twisting their arm. Just be classy enough to not insult or degrade or run down the LDS church or its leaders because you don't happen to agree with them. I would NEVER go on another faiths discussion group comprised mostly of members of that faith and run down their church leveling insults and corrections to those who are faithful followers of that particular church. That would just be classless. Yet on this site it happens constantly. Shots and insults are taken at all things LDS on about every thread discussing the LDS church. Some people need a lesson in manners and civility. [-(

Sure.. you never level insults or correction at those you disagree with... ;) I am not going to another faith's discussion group because I am not of another faith. I'm LDS, and it's just as much my church as yours. I have just as much right to promote my ideas here as you do you, as long as we do so within the forum rules and Brian's interpretation thereof. You just have a hard time understanding that someone could disagree with you.



I hate it when someone says," You don't belong in this church," and you reply," Its just as much my church as it is yours!" But they insist, " "You need to be saved or you will burn!" Stupid firemen

[Obrien]

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amen. If someone doesn't like the way the church operates they are under no obligation to support it either financially or in their labors. That is their choice. Nobody is twisting their arm. Just be classy enough to not insult or degrade or run down the LDS church or its leaders because you don't happen to agree with them. I would NEVER go on another faiths discussion group comprised mostly of members of that faith and run down their church leveling insults and corrections to those who are faithful followers of that particular church. That would just be classless. Yet on this site it happens constantly. Shots and insults are taken at all things LDS on about every thread discussing the LDS church. Some people need a lesson in manners and civility. [-(

Sure.. you never level insults or correction at those you disagree with... ;) I am not going to another faith's discussion group because I am not of another faith. I'm LDS, and it's just as much my church as yours. I have just as much right to promote my ideas here as you do you, as long as we do so within the forum rules and Brian's interpretation thereof. You just have a hard time understanding that someone could disagree with you.



I hate it when someone says," You don't belong in this church," and you reply," Its just as much my church as it is yours!" But they insist, " "You need to be saved or you will burn!" Stupid firemen

I can't decide if your comment makes no sense because it's past my bedtime or because you're being senseless. I'll re-read it tomorrow and decide then.

[Mark]

Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

[Mark]

"Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church."

Let me know when "honest" questions are being asked and I think you will find a different attitude from LDS folks who are active participants in the church. The questions I see on this form regarding the LDS faith are most often agenda driven diatribes dripping with cynicism and insults and innuendo and confirmation bias trying to paint the LDS church in the worst possible light. Everybody knows that questions formed in that way do not meet the standard of being "honest" questions. I have been around enough anti's who love to cast aspersions to know the difference.

[shadow]

I'm LDS, and it's just as much my church as yours.

download (2).jpg (10.6 KiB) Viewed 1690 times

[jbalm]

"Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church."

Let me know when "honest" questions are being asked and I think you will find a different attitude from LDS folks who are active participants in the church. The questions I see on this form regarding the LDS faith are most often agenda driven diatribes dripping with cynicism and insults and innuendo and confirmation bias trying to paint the LDS church in the worst possible light. Everybody knows that questions formed in that way do not meet the standard of being "honest" questions. I have been around enough anti's who love to cast aspersions to know the difference.

Another dodge. I can't remember the last time you said anything of substance. All you ever do is attack the character of people you disagree with.

Did you find the question in the OP dishonest?

If so, why?

[Finrock]

Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, in your opinion, is there any room in this Church to disagree with the Apostles?

-Finrock

[Mark]

"Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church."

Let me know when "honest" questions are being asked and I think you will find a different attitude from LDS folks who are active participants in the church. The questions I see on this form regarding the LDS faith are most often agenda driven diatribes dripping with cynicism and insults and innuendo and confirmation bias trying to paint the LDS church in the worst possible light. Everybody knows that questions formed in that way do not meet the standard of being "honest" questions. I have been around enough anti's who love to cast aspersions to know the difference.

Another dodge. I can't remember the last time you said anything of substance. All you ever do is attack the character of people you disagree with.

Did you find the question in the OP dishonest?


If so, why?

Sorry you feel that way bro. I know that you are estranged from the church. Your negative and demeaning attitudes about all things LDS come through loud and clear in most every post you make anymore. I dont pretend to know why the church has become such a negative to you in your life over the years. You and Obrien seem to delight in dishing out cynical barbs whenever there is any subject that can possibly portray a negative image of the church or its leadership. Clearly you have in some way been offended by someone or something. I hope you can find peace in your life without finding the need to put down the LDS church every chance you get. Cheers.

[Col. Flagg]

Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

[rewcox]

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

[Col. Flagg]

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

It is my understanding that they are all given a church credit card (with no limit) with which to use when on official church business – I see no problem with them using a church-provided credit card for expenses such as meals, airfare, lodging, other travel expenses, etc., but to also provide them with a $120,000 salary is wrong, especially when in 1997 they removed themselves from the boards of the church’s businesses, thus truly having no justification for it.

[ajax]

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

Not sure how you extrapolate specific instructions regarding JS to all future generations of 15's and 70's

[rewcox]

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

Not sure how you extrapolate specific instructions regarding JS to all future generations of 15's and 70's

Ok Ajax, never ever use a scripture said to someone else, in your life.

[rewcox]

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

It is my understanding that they are all given a church credit card (with no limit) with which to use when on official church business – I see no problem with them using a church-provided credit card for expenses such as meals, airfare, lodging, other travel expenses, etc., but to also provide them with a $120,000 salary is wrong, especially when in 1997 they removed themselves from the boards of the church’s businesses, thus truly having no justification for it.

Ok, that's a start. Anything else you want to add? Like have the members support them, etc.

[Separatist]

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

Not sure how you extrapolate specific instructions regarding JS to all future generations of 15's and 70's

Ok Ajax, never ever use a scripture said to someone else, in your life.

Not as justification to get paid.

[rewcox]

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

Not sure how you extrapolate specific instructions regarding JS to all future generations of 15's and 70's

Ok Ajax, never ever use a scripture said to someone else, in your life.

Not as justification to get paid.

And your quote from Alma to Korihor won't work either, it was directed to Korihor. Scratch the BOM and the D&C, well all scriptures. You can only use your Patriarchal Blessing.

[jbalm]

"Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church."

Let me know when "honest" questions are being asked and I think you will find a different attitude from LDS folks who are active participants in the church. The questions I see on this form regarding the LDS faith are most often agenda driven diatribes dripping with cynicism and insults and innuendo and confirmation bias trying to paint the LDS church in the worst possible light. Everybody knows that questions formed in that way do not meet the standard of being "honest" questions. I have been around enough anti's who love to cast aspersions to know the difference.

Another dodge. I can't remember the last time you said anything of substance. All you ever do is attack the character of people you disagree with.

Did you find the question in the OP dishonest?


If so, why?

Sorry you feel that way bro. I know that you are estranged from the church. Your negative and demeaning attitudes about all things LDS come through loud and clear in most every post you make anymore. I dont pretend to know why the church has become such a negative to you in your life over the years. You and Obrien seem to delight in dishing out cynical barbs whenever there is any subject that can possibly portray a negative image of the church or its leadership. Clearly you have in some way been offended by someone or something. I hope you can find peace in your life without finding the need to put down the LDS church every chance you get. Cheers.

Still nothing substantive. And yet another attack on the character of someone you disagree with.

Oh well. Thanks for proving my point, at least.

[Col. Flagg]

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!

So Col, what is your opinion on how the full-time GAs should be taken care of? I've referenced D&C 43 to show in our dispensation that it is appropriate.

How do you see it?

It is my understanding that they are all given a church credit card (with no limit) with which to use when on official church business – I see no problem with them using a church-provided credit card for expenses such as meals, airfare, lodging, other travel expenses, etc., but to also provide them with a $120,000 salary is wrong, especially when in 1997 they removed themselves from the boards of the church’s businesses, thus truly having no justification for it.

Ok, that's a start. Anything else you want to add? Like have the members support them, etc.

IMO, bring back the law of common consent and let the members of the church vote on whether or not the brethren should receive $120,000/year for their ‘service’ (see D&C sections 26 and 28) – this is perhaps one of the best examples of how we have strayed, when all financial activities are hidden from the membership while we indulge in Babylon by investing tithing, speculating in real estate, building for-profit businesses and then multi-billion dollar malls and million dollar condos with no accountability for these decisions to the membership.

[Amonhi]

Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

Happy to admit when I am wrong.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

This from the guy who no longer attends the LDS church and most likely doesn't pay a red cent of tithing or fast offerings to help the church anymore with anything. Go lecture your remnant folks with all your pious attitudes Tex. Your bias against all things LDS is deafening.. 8-|

When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

I am not, nor have I ever been a "remnant person." Ask any of the remnant people. I never bought into it.

But I am appalled by the LDS hypocrisy. The church sends out around 80,000 kids at a time to knock on people's doors throughout the world and as them to question their current beliefs. Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church.

Like my son said, on his mission..."why does the Church expect everyone to be open minded about the Church, but expect Church members to be so closed minded about everything else?"

When missionaries are directed to knock only on hardcore LDS doors, then maybe I'll feel obligated to keep my thoughts to myself.

That last line was funny. Thanks,

Amonhi