Deleted

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by brlenox »

CelestialAngel wrote: July 13th, 2017, 8:31 pm One thing I hear from non Mormons is with all the money used to build and maintain temples they could help the poor so much. So why can't we build humble temples and use the millions saved to help the homeless and starving. When Christ returns will He say wow look how decked out these temples and chandeliers are or will He say why havent you helped your neighbor in poverty and starving children. Couldn't temple ordinances still be done in less lavish buildings? And what do you think Christ wants more, hundreds of tens of millions of dollars palaces or for us to do our best to feed His sheep and help the less fortunate in the world? Even Utah has a serious homeless problem. Sorry for the rant but I just don't understand Jesus wanting luxury.
Think of David and Solomon. Why did they build the finest that man could produce?

User avatar
Zowieink
captain of 100
Posts: 725
Location: Mesa, AZ

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Zowieink »

The new Tuscan temple is an effort to reduce and contain the cost of sacred edifices. In a way, it was an experiment. Typically, the temple department has a preliminary plan and renderings of the celestial room, ordinance rooms, foyers, baptistery. They are sent to a select group to bid. The bids are not opened publically. Eventually a contractor is chosen. They then work with the temple department to "value engineer" the project. (Many times a temple may be a "pet" project of one of the apostles, at which point it starts to really become expensive). In the Tuscan temple example, the architect was given a budget and mandated to stay within that budget. The contractor and architect worked together to achieve a very cost effective building. The cost was easily 1/2 a comparably sized temple built elsewhere. It came in budget, and on schedule.

The Tuscan temple is described as beautifully simple. The Phoenix temple is elegant and restrained. The Gilbert temple is over the top! a great and spacious building, stunning, opulent.) I think the Church leaders are recognizing that these buildings become monuments to the architects and temple department interior designers and project managers as a "feather" in their collective caps. President Monson was none to happy about the opulence and extreme cost of the Gilbert Temple and told the temple department to never do that again, hence Tuscan's temple restrained budget and schedule. It is still a wonderful building for the work of the Lord, they all are. But for me, I prefer the quietness of simplicity. I don't like the architecture and furnishing screaming for attention when I am trying to concentrate on sacred ordinances.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by brianj »

Tuscan temple? The temple is being built in Lazio, near Rome, not in Tuscany. And I understand the first Italian temple is not being built with cost saving measures. The statues for the visitor's center are very expensive and they won't even be in the temple.

I would love to see a temple in Florence, but I don't think Tuscany will have a temple anytime soon.

Sunain
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2711
Location: Canada

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Sunain »

I think the price of the temples is very relative to the world monetary and commodity pricing. Yes, temples cost a lot, only because businesses and countries have set the price of things. All things on this earth were created by Him for our use. He intends for us to use these materials to build things. We want the best quality in construction and the best materials, why would we not?!

I was lucky enough just recently to visit the newly rededicated Montreal temple. Its a small temple but sufficient for the needs of the members in that area of Canada. The temple was first dedicated on June 4th, 2000 and unfortunately, "On Monday, June 2, 2014, the Montreal Quebec Temple closed for a complete renovation of the interior and exterior. The structure was reinforced, replacing the original wood framing with reinforced concrete and steel. And major repairs were carried out including remediation of a mold problem." Substandard materials and construction was used to build that temple and it only lasted 14 years! There is a perfect example of why we need to use the best materials and building techniques. It costs even more for repairs or reconstruction.

Montreal contractors are well known in Canada for their sloppy jobs. It seems the Rome Italy temple also has a similar problem as they changed building contractors.
On March 25, 2017, the construction of the Rome Italy Temple reached an important milestone with the installation of the angel Moroni atop the eastern spire. The event marked the now-steady progression of construction toward completion under the new general contractor.
http://ldschurchtemples.org/rome/
I remember President Hinckley at conference specifically making a point about the generous donations that are put towards temples. Many of us provide what we can because they do cost a lot but construction work in general costs a lot these days so I am not concerned about the price. Similar issue with Cedar Creek, 1.5billion or whatever, yeah, buildings cost money to build. Is anyone saying that materials should be cheaper or the labour should be cheaper?!
President Hinckley surprised the worldwide satellite-broadcast audience by making the following statement in the closing session of general conference on 4 April 1999:

“I feel impressed to announce that among all of the temples we are constructing, we plan to rebuild the Nauvoo Temple. A member of the Church and his family have provided a very substantial contribution to make this possible. We are grateful to him. It will be a while before it happens, but the architects have begun their work. … The new building will stand as a memorial to those who built the first such structure there on the banks of the Mississippi.”
https://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/07/pres ... e?lang=eng

User avatar
Yahtzee
captain of 100
Posts: 710

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Yahtzee »

brianj wrote: August 2nd, 2017, 8:47 pm Tuscan temple? The temple is being built in Lazio, near Rome, not in Tuscany. And I understand the first Italian temple is not being built with cost saving measures. The statues for the visitor's center are very expensive and they won't even be in the temple.

I would love to see a temple in Florence, but I don't think Tuscany will have a temple anytime soon.
I'm not sure if you're being facetious trying to point out a spelling error, but if not I'm nearly certain Zowieink was referring to the Tucson, AZ temple. It's a common misspelling.
And if you were, the winky face is your friend. :D

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Robin Hood »

Zowieink wrote: August 2nd, 2017, 6:38 pm (Many times a temple may be a "pet" project of one of the apostles, at which point it starts to really become expensive).
It is well known that President Hinckley took a very keen and personal interest in the Preston, England Temple. He even collected some earth from the groundbreaking and had his family place it in his coffin. He wanted to be buried with a bit of England, and especially that part of England.

At the time, the trend was for small temples, and I believe that is what we would have got at Preston but for President Hinckley's involvement.
I'm not complaining. :)

The rumour was the Preston Temple project came to £93 million. At the time that was around $150 million.

gardener4life
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1690

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by gardener4life »

I find it very interesting that people aren't bringing up the fact that part of why the temples are so BIG, which makes them costly, is so that we don't turn people away and that we can include everyone there. The poor can enter therein if they have a recommend; this will be better than selling our temples to give to the poor (someone will say I didn't say sell the temples, but if enough propaganda persists that temples are too costly some anti will have that as the next step), because the blessings of the temple are as a river of blessings and because it gives them a future. Giving someone some scraps of brood while some administrators steal from the poor funds doesn't give them a future. Which is better, a river of blessings or a a few scraps of bread? Which do you give them then?

So are part of why it's built costly because its meant to attract us to it? And we're meant to be attracted to the temple because it is the river of blessings talked about in Daniel and Revelations.

Why is it so important we include everyone in the temples who are living worthy of its standards? Its because we are not elitists and not exclusionists. We want everyone to be able to have what we have. Why do we want to give them everything we have? Because we know as long as we keep passing blessings down to those below us, blessings will keep flowing to us from above us. This is the principle behind Zion, being pure in heart and not withholding love to others; bear one anothers burdens (have equality) which can also mean share our problems and blessings. How do we bear their burdens and blessings? One way is that we give them access to the same chance for a future that we have? Where does that come from? The temple and following the Lord, and standing in holy places. (Standing in holy places can also not just mean the temple but lifting others up with service...hmm that's interesting we're told to stand in holy places when things start getting closer to Christ's coming and now we have new service programs opening up...I wonder why that is...). We don't turn away the poor or kick them out. (Alma & Amulek visit the Zoramites who were persecuted.) We make the temples so big so that that the poor are included there and so there is enough room for everyone. Why would someone complain about the temples if they are invited to have a place there too?

So there's a reason we make it big enough so that we don't have to turn anyone away, and invite all to enter in. The temple is the one place on Earth where everyone will always be equal.
Last edited by gardener4life on August 4th, 2017, 12:29 am, edited 2 times in total.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by brianj »

Yahtzee wrote: August 3rd, 2017, 2:58 am
brianj wrote: August 2nd, 2017, 8:47 pm Tuscan temple? The temple is being built in Lazio, near Rome, not in Tuscany. And I understand the first Italian temple is not being built with cost saving measures. The statues for the visitor's center are very expensive and they won't even be in the temple.

I would love to see a temple in Florence, but I don't think Tuscany will have a temple anytime soon.
I'm not sure if you're being facetious trying to point out a spelling error, but if not I'm nearly certain Zowieink was referring to the Tucson, AZ temple. It's a common misspelling.
And if you were, the winky face is your friend. :D
Nope, I wasn't being facetious. I don't recall ever seeing Tuscon misspelled as Tuscan, and when I saw "Tuscan temple" I immediately thought about Tuscany and became confused.

User avatar
Yahtzee
captain of 100
Posts: 710

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Yahtzee »

brianj wrote: August 3rd, 2017, 10:49 pm
Yahtzee wrote: August 3rd, 2017, 2:58 am
brianj wrote: August 2nd, 2017, 8:47 pm Tuscan temple? The temple is being built in Lazio, near Rome, not in Tuscany. And I understand the first Italian temple is not being built with cost saving measures. The statues for the visitor's center are very expensive and they won't even be in the temple.

I would love to see a temple in Florence, but I don't think Tuscany will have a temple anytime soon.
I'm not sure if you're being facetious trying to point out a spelling error, but if not I'm nearly certain Zowieink was referring to the Tucson, AZ temple. It's a common misspelling.
And if you were, the winky face is your friend. :D
Nope, I wasn't being facetious. I don't recall ever seeing Tuscon misspelled as Tuscan, and when I saw "Tuscan temple" I immediately thought about Tuscany and became confused.
You know, I didn't even catch the "a"! My brain saw Tuscon, not Tuscan. Well no wonder then!

User avatar
Zowieink
captain of 100
Posts: 725
Location: Mesa, AZ

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Zowieink »

Sorry, yes, my fingers and brain are not working together. It is the Tucson Temple.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by brianj »

Zowieink wrote: August 4th, 2017, 11:53 am Sorry, yes, my fingers and brain are not working together. It is the Tucson Temple.
I hope you didn't take any offense, and I hope to visit the Tuscon temple one day (just not in May through September!)

I also hope to visit a temple in Tuscany one day. But, given a choice, I would prefer to visit a temple in Friuli-Venezia Giulia. I have a fascination with Trieste for some reason.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Thinker »

CelestialAngel wrote: July 13th, 2017, 8:31 pm One thing I hear from non Mormons is with all the money used to build and maintain temples they could help the poor so much. So why can't we build humble temples and use the millions saved to help the homeless and starving. When Christ returns will He say wow look how decked out these temples and chandeliers are or will He say why havent you helped your neighbor in poverty and starving children. Couldn't temple ordinances still be done in less lavish buildings? And what do you think Christ wants more, hundreds of tens of millions of dollars palaces or for us to do our best to feed His sheep and help the less fortunate in the world? Even Utah has a serious homeless problem. Sorry for the rant but I just don't understand Jesus wanting luxury.
Good questions. I think we all know the answer - but there may be social or other pressure to do what men want over what Jesus would want.

EmmaLee
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10884

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by EmmaLee »

I think the Church leaders are recognizing that these buildings become monuments to the architects and temple department interior designers and project managers as a "feather" in their collective caps. President Monson was none to happy about the opulence and extreme cost of the Gilbert Temple and told the temple department to never do that again, hence Tuscan's temple restrained budget and schedule.
If what you say is true about President Monson, his directive has been ignored, as the brand new Meridian, Idaho temple is every bit as opulent and lavish as the Gilbert temple, if not more so.

Crackers
captain of 100
Posts: 584

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Crackers »

Thinker wrote: January 21st, 2018, 8:41 am
CelestialAngel wrote: July 13th, 2017, 8:31 pm One thing I hear from non Mormons is with all the money used to build and maintain temples they could help the poor so much. So why can't we build humble temples and use the millions saved to help the homeless and starving. When Christ returns will He say wow look how decked out these temples and chandeliers are or will He say why havent you helped your neighbor in poverty and starving children. Couldn't temple ordinances still be done in less lavish buildings? And what do you think Christ wants more, hundreds of tens of millions of dollars palaces or for us to do our best to feed His sheep and help the less fortunate in the world? Even Utah has a serious homeless problem. Sorry for the rant but I just don't understand Jesus wanting luxury.
Good questions. I think we all know the answer - but there may be social or other pressure to do what men want over what Jesus would want.
"We all" meaning those who don't support the Prophets and Apostles of Jesus Christ or trust them to know what He would want.

drtanner
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1850

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by drtanner »

Crackers wrote: January 21st, 2018, 9:39 am
Thinker wrote: January 21st, 2018, 8:41 am
CelestialAngel wrote: July 13th, 2017, 8:31 pm One thing I hear from non Mormons is with all the money used to build and maintain temples they could help the poor so much. So why can't we build humble temples and use the millions saved to help the homeless and starving. When Christ returns will He say wow look how decked out these temples and chandeliers are or will He say why havent you helped your neighbor in poverty and starving children. Couldn't temple ordinances still be done in less lavish buildings? And what do you think Christ wants more, hundreds of tens of millions of dollars palaces or for us to do our best to feed His sheep and help the less fortunate in the world? Even Utah has a serious homeless problem. Sorry for the rant but I just don't understand Jesus wanting luxury.
Good questions. I think we all know the answer - but there may be social or other pressure to do what men want over what Jesus would want.
"We all" meaning those who don't support the Prophets and Apostles of Jesus Christ or trust them to know what He would want.
Not sure what it is going to take to help people understand that its not just about giving money to the poor. There is so much more that goes into this. Do we lack the faith in understanding that giving our best to the Lord, and putting him first and sacrificing to worship him qualify us to receive power and miracles from heaven. Becoming pure in heart is the answer to ridding the world of poverty and that is what the temple is all about. I would spend every last ounce of money for the opportunity for all of us to learn this principle.

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by David13 »

drtanner wrote: January 21st, 2018, 10:10 am
Crackers wrote: January 21st, 2018, 9:39 am
Thinker wrote: January 21st, 2018, 8:41 am
CelestialAngel wrote: July 13th, 2017, 8:31 pm One thing I hear from non Mormons is with all the money used to build and maintain temples they could help the poor so much. So why can't we build humble temples and use the millions saved to help the homeless and starving. When Christ returns will He say wow look how decked out these temples and chandeliers are or will He say why havent you helped your neighbor in poverty and starving children. Couldn't temple ordinances still be done in less lavish buildings? And what do you think Christ wants more, hundreds of tens of millions of dollars palaces or for us to do our best to feed His sheep and help the less fortunate in the world? Even Utah has a serious homeless problem. Sorry for the rant but I just don't understand Jesus wanting luxury.
Good questions. I think we all know the answer - but there may be social or other pressure to do what men want over what Jesus would want.
"We all" meaning those who don't support the Prophets and Apostles of Jesus Christ or trust them to know what He would want.
Not sure what it is going to take to help people understand that its not just about giving money to the poor. There is so much more that goes into this. Do we lack the faith in understanding that giving our best to the Lord, and putting him first and sacrificing to worship him qualify us to receive power and miracles from heaven. Becoming pure in heart is the answer to ridding the world of poverty and that is what the temple is all about. I would spend every last ounce of money for the opportunity for all of us to learn this principle.

Actually, as has been pointed out here, it would be impossible to ever rid the world of poverty due to the simple fact that there are people who very much like living in "poverty" because it enables them to live their life as they want to live it.
I have never felt that it should be up to me to believe I have the power, or the money, or the ego or whatever, to take that away from them.
dc

User avatar
Mark
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6929

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Mark »

CelestialAngel wrote: July 14th, 2017, 10:56 am
5tev3 wrote: July 14th, 2017, 9:25 am
Robin Hood wrote: July 14th, 2017, 3:34 am While that is true, the fact is $1.2 billion is a very small amount compared to the funds and assets the church has at its disposal. Especially over a timeframe of a number of years, which is how that figure is arrived at.
And while an argument can be made in favour of the church's position regarding temples, which is the topic of the OP, we start to get into difficulties when things like City Creek are considered.

That said, we are a church and not a homeless charity.
I'm not an expert on City Creek, I have been there a few times though when I have passed through Salt Lake on business, we'd eat at the Cheesecake Factory. The stickiness of the situation as I see it (and correct me if I am wrong in any way) is that the Church owns that property right smack in the middle of downtown where it affects the lives of the other citizens in the community and the economy as a whole.

What it seems to me happened is that they considered what the property was bringing in revenue-wise for the Church and the value it was bringing to the community and over time they considered plans that could make the best use of the property. When you have expensive land in the middle of a city and a huge structure built on it and need to make big changes, that isn't going to be cheap.

They could simply sell the land and lose control of what gets put there and use up all that money in a given period of time, or they could do a project that would continue to bring in revenue continually. Think of the principle of the talents. While I don't personally like the idea of the church building a mall because when you just spit it out like that it sounds course and definitely unappealing.

However, the facts of the situation are that the church owns that land and they had to make decisions on the value it was in it's current state or if it could be more valuable with some investment and a new strategy. Again, I'm just an outside observer but those are some things to perhaps consider.
So the church is as much of a business as it is a church?
Do a little research on what Zion will be like. In fact look into how the temple will be laid out in Jackson County. Do you think the Lord cares about how much it might all cost? All things are the Lords. We are only worthy or unworthy stewards. Temples are not edifices of Babylon. Nothing is to good for the Lord. The streets of the Celestial kingdom appear to be paved with gold. Just think of how much that would cost.. ;)

Juliet
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3701

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Juliet »

I don't know the answer, but I do know that my heart will ache until the day there is no more poor among us. I am aware that good intentions to help does not always help and sometimes tough love is the best way to help people. If I had all the money in the world I would feed the hard workers and the parasites. Even if it ended up being wasted time and time again. I suppose I am foolish in that way. The cities spend so much money on trees in parks and along streets. It bothers me that we don't plant fruit trees so there will be free food for the community.

We are just a church full of fallen people looking for God. Maybe once we find Him, we will be able to help others. But the church is for the poor in spirit and we need help too. The beauty of the temple gives me hope there is a better world beyond this one. I am grateful for its beauty while at the same time aching for those who suffer in poverty. In the end, it will be creating a foundation of righteous principles that will end poverty once and for all. In this way, what we do with our spiritual lives is important. When we create a temple of love in our church, and then home, and then physical bodies, then we will have created abundance spiritually and then what has been created spiritually will become physical.

Should we throw away all the diamonds and rubies just because most rocks are dirt and sediment? Or should we cherish them as an example of what future dirt may someday mineralize and become?

davedan
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3064
Location: Augusta, GA
Contact:

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by davedan »

Are LDS Temples too expensive?

Short answer = absolutely not.

Long answer:
1. Temples should be built as nicely as is reasonably possible, because it shows the value we place in them.

2. Temples in 3rd-world countries should be just as nice as anywhere else in the world so that a family living in a hut with a dirt floor and have just the exact same wonderful experience in the temple as the wealthiest member in Salt Lake or anywhere else.

3. Judas complained about the expense of the alabaster flask and ointment the women used to anoint Christ feet saying that the ointment could have been sold and money given to the poor. This was Judas' hypocritical attitude just before betraying Christ for 30 pieces of silver.

4. The temple is the answer/solution to global poverty.

5. Temples are embassies of the Celestial Kingdom and are the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. Endowed members are its ambassadors.
Last edited by davedan on January 21st, 2018, 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
mcusick
captain of 100
Posts: 391
Location: Texas

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by mcusick »

brianj wrote: July 13th, 2017, 10:37 pm When antichrists I know throw this accusation at me I have a simple and humble response ready to go:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has spent over $1.2 billion on humanitarian aid. How about the charities you donate money to?

Of course these people don't donate; they only oppose religion, so at this point they start kicking against the pricks. If they try telling me how much more we could have spent I am again ready to rebut:
Without the organization, teachings, and temples of this church the billion and a quarter would not have been donated.

Source: http://www.worldreligionnews.com/religi ... an-efforts
$1.2 billion in what time-frame?

Answer: 30 years

People complain about the American Red Cross, but if you are concerned with humanitarian aid they give significantly more away:

Numbers from 2016 (http://www.redcross.org/news/press-rele ... -Donations)
$1,736.3 million - Collect, test, manufacture and distribute approximately 6.8 million blood products
$332.8 million – Respond to disasters – nearly 64,000 per year
$65.2 million – Provide more than 369,000 emergency services to our armed forces and their families
$148.3 million - Deliver preparedness, health and safety courses like First Aid and CPR
$119.7 million – Fund international relief programs
$33.2 million – Fund community services (e.g., food banks, transportation programs)

Crackers
captain of 100
Posts: 584

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Crackers »

mcusick wrote: January 21st, 2018, 8:52 pm
brianj wrote: July 13th, 2017, 10:37 pm When antichrists I know throw this accusation at me I have a simple and humble response ready to go:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has spent over $1.2 billion on humanitarian aid. How about the charities you donate money to?

Of course these people don't donate; they only oppose religion, so at this point they start kicking against the pricks. If they try telling me how much more we could have spent I am again ready to rebut:
Without the organization, teachings, and temples of this church the billion and a quarter would not have been donated.

Source: http://www.worldreligionnews.com/religi ... an-efforts
$1.2 billion in what time-frame?

Answer: 30 years

People complain about the American Red Cross, but if you are concerned with humanitarian aid they give significantly more away:

Numbers from 2016 (http://www.redcross.org/news/press-rele ... -Donations)
$1,736.3 million - Collect, test, manufacture and distribute approximately 6.8 million blood products
$332.8 million – Respond to disasters – nearly 64,000 per year
$65.2 million – Provide more than 369,000 emergency services to our armed forces and their families
$148.3 million - Deliver preparedness, health and safety courses like First Aid and CPR
$119.7 million – Fund international relief programs
$33.2 million – Fund community services (e.g., food banks, transportation programs)
My understanding is that the Red Cross is terribly inefficient in their spending. I have known a few people who have volunteered for them and they have given me the gist of how things operate. At least two of these people admit that they themselves would never donate money to the red cross after witnessing their operations up close.

User avatar
mcusick
captain of 100
Posts: 391
Location: Texas

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by mcusick »

2 Nephi 28: 13 "They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing"

So let's agree this is talking about a bad, bad church, and it would probably be a good idea to avoid making this same mistake.

I think the Lord places the poor above fine sanctuaries and fine clothing. Agree?

I don't speak for God like lot's of people on this forum. I consider myself a Yankee guesser like Brigham. But I think if God is outraged about a church's priorities, one way you could avoid that would be a simple price match.

E.g., if said bad church spent $100,000,000.00 in a year on fine sanctuaries and fine clothing, they could spend at least $100,000,000.01 on the poor. I don't know if that is good enough for the Lord, but you could potentially rationalize your behavior and claim you prioritize your efforts on the poor over buildings.

"For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known"

User avatar
mcusick
captain of 100
Posts: 391
Location: Texas

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by mcusick »

Crackers wrote: January 21st, 2018, 9:07 pm
mcusick wrote: January 21st, 2018, 8:52 pm
brianj wrote: July 13th, 2017, 10:37 pm When antichrists I know throw this accusation at me I have a simple and humble response ready to go:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has spent over $1.2 billion on humanitarian aid. How about the charities you donate money to?

Of course these people don't donate; they only oppose religion, so at this point they start kicking against the pricks. If they try telling me how much more we could have spent I am again ready to rebut:
Without the organization, teachings, and temples of this church the billion and a quarter would not have been donated.

Source: http://www.worldreligionnews.com/religi ... an-efforts
$1.2 billion in what time-frame?

Answer: 30 years

People complain about the American Red Cross, but if you are concerned with humanitarian aid they give significantly more away:

Numbers from 2016 (http://www.redcross.org/news/press-rele ... -Donations)
$1,736.3 million - Collect, test, manufacture and distribute approximately 6.8 million blood products
$332.8 million – Respond to disasters – nearly 64,000 per year
$65.2 million – Provide more than 369,000 emergency services to our armed forces and their families
$148.3 million - Deliver preparedness, health and safety courses like First Aid and CPR
$119.7 million – Fund international relief programs
$33.2 million – Fund community services (e.g., food banks, transportation programs)
My understanding is that the Red Cross is terribly inefficient in their spending. I have known a few people who have volunteered for them and they have given me the gist of how things operate. At least two of these people admit that they themselves would never donate money to the red cross after witnessing their operations up close.
I have heard similar things.

I have also heard anecdotally that working in the church office building is the fastest way to loose your testimony.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Thinker »

David13 wrote: January 21st, 2018, 1:38 pm
drtanner wrote: January 21st, 2018, 10:10 am
Crackers wrote: January 21st, 2018, 9:39 am
Thinker wrote: January 21st, 2018, 8:41 am
Good questions. I think we all know the answer - but there may be social or other pressure to do what men want over what Jesus would want.
"We all" meaning those who don't support the Prophets and Apostles of Jesus Christ or trust them to know what He would want.
Not sure what it is going to take to help people understand that its not just about giving money to the poor. There is so much more that goes into this. Do we lack the faith in understanding that giving our best to the Lord, and putting him first and sacrificing to worship him qualify us to receive power and miracles from heaven. Becoming pure in heart is the answer to ridding the world of poverty and that is what the temple is all about. I would spend every last ounce of money for the opportunity for all of us to learn this principle.

Actually, as has been pointed out here, it would be impossible to ever rid the world of poverty due to the simple fact that there are people who very much like living in "poverty" because it enables them to live their life as they want to live it.
I have never felt that it should be up to me to believe I have the power, or the money, or the ego or whatever, to take that away from them.
dc
It seems some are clueless about what extreme poverty is - like LACK of clean water, food, basic health care. Have you ever been to a home with a dirt floor and leaking tin roof? Have you known people who suffered or even died for lack of simple medical treatment because they had no access to it? Remember that the US is not the world.

Try telling Jesus that the good Samaritan story was irrelevant because it was encouraging giving to someone wanting to be so desperate. What would Jesus say?

It saddens me when people of the church of JESUS CHRIST preach against his basic most important teachings! Who is your God? Whose church is this really?

User avatar
Zowieink
captain of 100
Posts: 725
Location: Mesa, AZ

Re: Are temples too expensive?

Post by Zowieink »

There is a line between beautiful and opulence. Beauty can be achieve using materials that are cost effective and meet the intent of the design and do not create a opulent "over-the-top" feel. Having been one of the lucky architects to be responsible to a massive interior remodel on a local temple, there is much inefficiency in the Temple Department that oversees these projects. While each temple should be unique to its locale, there are many similarities that can in used from temple to temple, especially in the smaller ones, instead of constantly reinventing. The issue becomes when the architect/designer/project manager looses perspective and has to much ego concerning the project. President Monson after doing the cornerstone of a temple told the head of the Temple Department to never do such an "opulent" building again. The next two temples were much simpler, but still as beautiful and restful to the eye. Beauty does not need expensive materials (stone tile I watched be installed cost $700.00 per tile, which is crazy!). Much could be done to provide beautiful temples and grounds while maintaining a respectful budget and provide a work that is worthy of all acceptation by the Lord. Beauty does not always = $$$

Post Reply