Mormon Church has $100 BILLION

[Watchmen]

So - unlike what you claimed in Post #233 - you are now claiming that tithing is immoral.

Flip and flop?

Would you feel the same about other Gospel standards? Would you say for example,

"Threatening to withhold spiritual blessings and promises from someone because they commit fornication is immoral on its face."

Are you of the mind-set that "spiritual blessings and promises" are entitlements? That people are guaranteed these things regardless of what they do or don't do?

Prepare to be disappointed if that is the case.

Or do you believe it is immoral just because it involves money?

Do you believe that the Priests and Levites were immoral for demanding tributes and offerings for participation in Temple ordinances anciently?

Would you consider it immoral if the Church were penniless?

You can't seem to understand that the paying of tithes is less about the money and more about humility, faith and obedience to God's commands.

I mean - if it were all about the money - then members who struggle with tithing would be expected to "back pay" what they failed to give.

However - when leaders meet with those who are struggling with tithing they encourage them to pay starting right then and to forget about the past.

I struggled at one point and my bishop didn't ask me, "How much do you owe us?" He simply told me to start paying again.

God has set the standards for participation in ordinances.

If you don't live up to His standards (which are really low considering that the Church will one day be living the Law of Consecration) - then you did not earn those spiritual blessings and promises.

End of story.

I haven't refused anything.

As I have been saying - I already answered that question.

If you have been reading my posts you would have seen that.

I'll throw you a bone though. It's in Post #220.

You have shared an opinion - not an argument.

Arguments are claims backed up with evidence.

All you have done is share your opinion that tithing is immoral - while ignoring the evidence I shared from the Standards Works that disagree with that opinion and my questions that prove that you have no argument.

Don’t misrepresent what I say. The act of paying tithing is not immoral. The Church withholding blessings and threatening members is. Give us money or you don’t get exaltation!

Give me a straight answer. Try.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Don’t misrepresent what I say. The act of paying tithing is not immoral. The Church withholding blessings and threatening members is. Give us money or you don’t get exaltation!

Money somehow makes it immoral - to you - for some reason.

You're ignoring the fact that the Standard Works and the doctrine of the Church do not claim that not going to the Temple denies anyone exaltation.

You're ignoring the fact that God Himself asked that His people pay tithes - according to the Standard Works.

You're ignoring the fact that no one is entitled to any blessing from God unless they do what He has commanded - also recorded in the Standard Works.

You're ignoring the fact that the paying of tithes is treated exactly the same as other Gospel Standards like the Law of Chastity, the Word of Wisdom or keeping the Sabbath Day holy.

You're ignoring the fact that the Standard Works claims that God will bless those who pay their tithes and that the "destroying angel" would also pass by them.

You're ignoring the fact that the Israelites had to give offerings or tributes in order to participate in Temple worship anciently.

You have to ignore basically everything in order for your claim to make sense - and even then it's just your opinion - not a claim backed up with evidence.

You have yet to provide a reason to believe that the Church denying someone entrance to the Temple due to them not living according to Gospel Standards is immoral.

You just keep claiming that it is over and over again.

If you don't believe in the paying of tithes - then you don't believe in Latter-day Saint doctrine - including exaltation.

If you don't like paying tithes - then you wouldn't like being a Latter-day Saint - because they pay tithes.

If you believe that living up to Gospel Standards - which includes paying tithes - is immoral - then don't join the Church.

Simple.

Give me a straight answer. Try.

I already did in Post #220.

Why can't you just read it there?

Are you having difficulty navigating the site?

Do you need me to re-post it for you?

 

[Watchmen]

Money somehow makes it immoral - to you - for some reason.

You're ignoring the fact that the Standard Works and the doctrine of the Church do not claim that not going to the Temple denies anyone exaltation.

You're ignoring the fact that God Himself asked that His people pay tithes - according to the Standard Works.

You're ignoring the fact that no one is entitled to any blessing from God unless they do what He has commanded - also recorded in the Standard Works.

You're ignoring the fact that the paying of tithes is treated exactly the same as other Gospel Standards like the Law of Chastity, the Word of Wisdom or keeping the Sabbath Day holy.

You're ignoring the fact that the Standard Works claims that God will bless those who pay their tithes and that the "destroying angel" would also pass by them.

You're ignoring the fact that the Israelites had to give offerings or tributes in order to participate in Temple worship anciently.

You have to ignore basically everything in order for your claim to make sense - and even then it's just your opinion - not a claim backed up with evidence.

You have yet to provide a reason to believe that the Church denying someone entrance to the Temple due to them not living according to Gospel Standards is immoral.

You just keep claiming that it is over and over again.

If you don't believe in the paying of tithes - then you don't believe in Latter-day Saint doctrine - including exaltation.

If you don't like paying tithes - then you wouldn't like being a Latter-day Saint - because they pay tithes.

If you believe that living up to Gospel Standards - which includes paying tithes - is immoral - then don't join the Church.

Simple.

I already did in Post #220.

Why can't you just read it there?

Are you having difficulty navigating the site?

Do you need me to re-post it for you?

Sure. Repost. It’s not a simple answer you provided but a twisted one.

If temple work wasn’t required then why is there work done for the dead?

It’s immoral. The richest snake oil salesman I’ve ever seen.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Sure. Repost. It’s not a simple answer you provided but a twisted one.

It's just not an answer you like - but you are in no position to demand any one answer from me.

Here is Post #220 in it's entirety - see if you can spot the answer,

"No one needs to pay tithing to get baptized.

In order to get baptized a person needs to show a willingness to keep the standards set by God.

If someone says that they are not willing to keep the Law of Chastity as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to keep the Law of Chastity.

If they say that they are willing to keep the Law of Chastity - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they mess up and and commit fornication after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to keep the Law of Chastity.

If someone says that they are not willing to keep the Word of Wisdom as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to keep the Word of Wisdom.

If they say that they are willing to keep the Word of Wisdom - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they mess up and smoke a cigarette after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to keep the Word of Wisdom.

If someone says that they are not willing to keep the Sabbath Day holy as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to keep the Sabbath Day holy.

If they say that they are willing to keep the Sabbath Day holy - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they mess up and stop coming to Church or rendering service after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to keep the Sabbath Day holy.

If someone says that they are not willing to pay their tithes as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to pay their tithes.

If they say that they are willing to pay their tithes - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they never once pay any tithing after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to pay their tithes.

These are all standards that God has asked faithful members of His Church to keep.

All they need in order to join His Church is a willingness to follow His standards.

If they have no willingness to do as He says - then they obviously do not wish to be members of His Church - so nothing is denied them.

If they have a willingness to do as He says - but are unable to follow through after being baptized - they remain members of His Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and do as He commands.

God commands that members of His Church pay tithes.

I understand that you do not like this fact - but you have yet to provide any reason to believe that it is immoral for God to ask members of His Church to pay tithes.

You also have yet to provide any reason to believe that it is immoral for God's church to have $100 billion."

If temple work wasn’t required then why is there work done for the dead?

You are misrepresenting what I said.

I talked about "going to the Temple" - not vicarious ordinances for the dead.

Not going to the Temple in this life does not deny anyone access to the Celestial Kingdom.

I know you won't read it but I would refer you to the Prophet's account of seeing his older brother - who died before the Restoration and who had never been baptized or gone to the Temple - in the Celestial Kingdom along with Abraham and the Father and the Son.

Doctrine and Covenants 137

It’s immoral. The richest snake oil salesman I’ve ever seen.

So - that's it - you finally admit it.

You believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a false church. That is the core of your "argument".

Otherwise you would not describe the Church as a "snake oil salesman". A charlatan or quack.

And I'm sure that you'd consider any "snake oil salesman" - either rich or poor - to be immoral.

No wonder you didn't want to answer my question about if you'd still consider the paying of tithes to be immoral if the Church had been penniless.

If you had answered that question truthfully - you would have said "Yes" because you believe the Church is false - thus making the subject of how much money the Church has irrelevant.

You kept mentioning the money to distract everyone from your actual "beef" with the Church.

So - this was never about the Church having $100 billion - but about you believing that the Church is false.

You don't think it is immoral for the Church to ask for tithes - but since you consider the Church to be false - it's all of a sudden immoral.

You believe that the Church is "selling" lies.

Basically - your claim is not based on any evidence - but your own subjective bias.

 

[Watchmen]

It's just not an answer you like - but you are in no position to demand any one answer from me.

Here is Post #220 in it's entirety - see if you can spot the answer,

"No one needs to pay tithing to get baptized.

In order to get baptized a person needs to show a willingness to keep the standards set by God.

If someone says that they are not willing to keep the Law of Chastity as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to keep the Law of Chastity.

If they say that they are willing to keep the Law of Chastity - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they mess up and and commit fornication after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to keep the Law of Chastity.

If someone says that they are not willing to keep the Word of Wisdom as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to keep the Word of Wisdom.

If they say that they are willing to keep the Word of Wisdom - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they mess up and smoke a cigarette after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to keep the Word of Wisdom.

If someone says that they are not willing to keep the Sabbath Day holy as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to keep the Sabbath Day holy.

If they say that they are willing to keep the Sabbath Day holy - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they mess up and stop coming to Church or rendering service after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to keep the Sabbath Day holy.

If someone says that they are not willing to pay their tithes as it was described to them - they will not get baptized - because they don't want to be members of His Church.

Faithful members of His Church have a willingness to pay their tithes.

If they say that they are willing to pay their tithes - they can get baptized - because they have a willingness to live by His standards.

If they never once pay any tithing after baptism - they remain baptized members of the Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and to pay their tithes.

These are all standards that God has asked faithful members of His Church to keep.

All they need in order to join His Church is a willingness to follow His standards.

If they have no willingness to do as He says - then they obviously do not wish to be members of His Church - so nothing is denied them.

If they have a willingness to do as He says - but are unable to follow through after being baptized - they remain members of His Church - but they will be encouraged to repent and do as He commands.

God commands that members of His Church pay tithes.

I understand that you do not like this fact - but you have yet to provide any reason to believe that it is immoral for God to ask members of His Church to pay tithes.

You also have yet to provide any reason to believe that it is immoral for God's church to have $100 billion."

You are misrepresenting what I said.

I talked about "going to the Temple" - not vicarious ordinances for the dead.

Not going to the Temple in this life does not deny anyone access to the Celestial Kingdom.

I know you won't read it but I would refer you to the Prophet's account of seeing his older brother - who died before the Restoration and who had never been baptized or gone to the Temple - in the Celestial Kingdom along with Abraham and the Father and the Son.

Doctrine and Covenants 137

So - that's it - you finally admit it.

You believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a false church. That is the core of your "argument".

Otherwise you would not describe the Church as a "snake oil salesman". A charlatan or quack.

And I'm sure that you'd consider any "snake oil salesman" - either rich or poor - to be immoral.

No wonder you didn't want to answer my question about if you'd still consider the paying of tithes to be immoral if the Church had been penniless.

If you had answered that question truthfully - you would have said "Yes" because you believe the Church is false - thus making the subject of how much money the Church has irrelevant.

You kept mentioning the money to distract everyone from your actual "beef" with the Church.

So - this was never about the Church having $100 billion - but about you believing that the Church is false.

You don't think it is immoral for the Church to ask for tithes - but since you consider the Church to be false - it's all of a sudden immoral.

You believe that the Church is "selling" lies.

Basically - your claim is not based on any evidence - but your own subjective bias.

What is morally right is often in the eye of the beholder. Pretty sure my morality trumps yours in this issue.

Also, your rant actually doesn’t answer this very simple and SPECIFIC question: If a person states he is unwilling to pay tithing, can he be baptized? It’s a yes or no question. Are you able to answer without all sorts of caveats and disclaimers?

Is it your assertion that Joseph’s older brother never had his temple work done?

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

What is morally right is often in the eye of the beholder. Pretty sure my morality trumps yours in this issue.

Also, your rant actually doesn’t answer this very simple and SPECIFIC question: If a person states he is unwilling to pay tithing, can he be baptized? It’s a yes or no question. Are you able to answer without all sorts of caveats and disclaimers?

Is it your assertion that Joseph’s older brother never had his temple work done?

None of that matters now - you have exposed your hand.

You believe that God asking members of His Church - through His chosen servants - to pay tithes in exchange for the promises of blessings and eventual exaltation is immoral because of your opinion that the Church is a fraud and that those promises are lies.

However - if the promises made by God to the members of His Church - through His chosen servants - is true then you cannot possibly consider the paying of tithes to be immoral since they receive exactly what they are "paying" for.

If the snake-oil sold by the salesman does cure cancer - as he initially claimed - then there would be nothing immoral about him receiving payment for the oil and eventually getting rich.

Your entire claim hinges on whether or not the claims made by the Church are true.

Since it is not possible to test those claims in this life your "argument" is nothing but your opinion.

You are done here.

 

[Watchmen]

None of that matters now - you have exposed your hand.

You believe that God asking members of His Church - through His chosen servants - to pay tithes in exchange for the promises of blessings and eventual exaltation is immoral because of your opinion that the Church is a fraud and that those promises are lies.

However - if the promises made by God to the members of His Church - through His chosen servants - is true then you cannot possibly consider the paying of tithes to be immoral since they receive exactly what they are "paying" for.

If the snake-oil sold by the salesman does cure cancer - as he initially claimed - then there would be nothing immoral about him receiving payment for the oil and eventually getting rich.

Your entire claim hinges on whether or not the claims made by the Church are true.

Since it is not possible to test those claims in this life your "argument" is nothing but your opinion.

You are done here.

No my claims hinge on morality. Just because you’re a true believer doesn’t make the church right, nor does it make what the church moral. Churches are capable of moral and immoral behavior regardless of whether they are “true” or not.

You were done a long time ago. Not once did you provide the simple yes or no answer requested.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

No my claims hinge on morality.

Exactly.

The "morality" of a "snake-oil salesman" depends on whether or not the snake-oil does what the salesman claims that it does.

If the salesman sells snake-oil that does not do what he claims that it does - then it would be immoral for him to receive payment or get rich off of the selling of that snake-oil.

If the salesman sells snake-oil that does what he claims that it does - then it would not be immoral for him to receive payment or get rich off of the selling of that snake-oil.

God asking members of His Church to pay tithes in exchange for promised blessings and eventual exaltation is not immoral if the members receive those things.

Your "morality" hinges on whether the claims of the Church are fraudulent or not - and you cannot prove them either way - so you have no "argument".

Just an opinion - or tantrum - in your case.

Just because you’re a true believer doesn’t make the church right, nor does it make what the church moral.

Never claimed that it did.

Churches are capable of moral and immoral behavior regardless of whether they are “true” or not.

That has not been your "argument" (i.e. "tantrum").

Your entire "argument" (i.e. "tantrum") about morality and the paying of tithes has been based on your beliefs. Not facts.

You can only claim that it is immoral based on your belief that the Church is lying.

If everything the Church promises about the paying of tithes is true - then members paying tithes is not immoral.

This is simple logic.

You exposed your bias with your "rich snake-oil salesman" comment. It's over.

You were done a long time ago. Not once did you provide the simple yes or no answer requested.

Why do you assume that you have authority to tell me how I can answer questions?

I answered your questions - which is more than I got from you.

You ran away from all of my questions and quotes from the Standard Works.

You did this because you knew that your "argument" (i.e. "tantrum") was weak.

Game over man. Game over.

 

[Watchmen]

Exactly.

The "morality" of a "snake-oil salesman" depends on whether or not the snake-oil does what the salesman claims that it does.

If the salesman sells snake-oil that does not do what he claims that it does - then it would be immoral for him to receive payment or get rich off of the selling of that snake-oil.

If the salesman sells snake-oil that does what he claims that it does - then it would not be immoral for him to receive payment or get rich off of the selling of that snake-oil.

God asking members of His Church to pay tithes in exchange for promised blessings and eventual exaltation is not immoral if the members receive those things.

Your "morality" hinges on whether the claims of the Church are fraudulent or not - and you cannot prove them either way - so you have no "argument".

Just an opinion - or tantrum - in your case.

Never claimed that it did.

That has not been your "argument" (i.e. "tantrum").

Your entire "argument" (i.e. "tantrum") about morality and the paying of tithes has been based on your beliefs. Not facts.

You can only claim that it is immoral based on your belief that the Church is lying.

If everything the Church promises about the paying of tithes is true - then members paying tithes is not immoral.

This is simple logic.

You exposed your bias with your "rich snake-oil salesman" comment. It's over.

Why do you assume that you have authority to tell me how I can answer questions?

I answered your questions - which is more than I got from you.

You ran away from all of my questions and quotes from the Standard Works.

You did this because you knew that your "argument" (i.e. "tantrum") was weak.

Game over man. Game over.

Wrong. As I said, it doesn’t matter if the church is true or not. It’s immoral per se. you only think it’s moral because you’re a blinded true believer.

 

[Watchmen]

Wrong. As I said, it doesn’t matter if the church is true or not. It’s immoral per se.

Exactly.

The "morality" of a "snake-oil salesman" depends on whether or not the snake-oil does what the salesman claims that it does.

If the salesman sells snake-oil that does not do what he claims that it does - then it would be immoral for him to receive payment or get rich off of the selling of that snake-oil.

If the salesman sells snake-oil that does what he claims that it does - then it would not be immoral for him to receive payment or get rich off of the selling of that snake-oil.

God asking members of His Church to pay tithes in exchange for promised blessings and eventual exaltation is not immoral if the members receive those things.

Your "morality" hinges on whether the claims of the Church are fraudulent or not - and you cannot prove them either way - so you have no "argument".

Just an opinion - or tantrum - in your case.

Never claimed that it did.

That has not been your "argument" (i.e. "tantrum").

Your entire "argument" (i.e. "tantrum") about morality and the paying of tithes has been based on your beliefs. Not facts.

You can only claim that it is immoral based on your belief that the Church is lying.

If everything the Church promises about the paying of tithes is true - then members paying tithes is not immoral.

This is simple logic.

You exposed your bias with your "rich snake-oil salesman" comment. It's over.

Why do you assume that you have authority to tell me how I can answer questions?

I answered your questions - which is more than I got from you.

You ran away from all of my questions and quotes from the Standard Works.

You did this because you knew that your "argument" (i.e. "tantrum") was weak.

Game over man. Game over.

You can’t provide a simple answer because you have to do mental gymnastics to justify your position.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Wrong. As I said, it doesn’t matter if the church is true or not. It’s immoral per se. you only think it’s moral because you’re a blinded true believer.

That literally makes zero sense.

I know you don't answer my questions - but I'll ask anyway.

If a salesman claimed that the snake-oil he was selling cured cancer and a cancer-patient was cured of his cancer after purchasing and using the snake-oil - you would still consider it immoral for the salesman to be paid for his snake-oil?

You can’t provide a simple answer because you have to do mental gymnastics to justify your position.

I'm gonna ask a couple more questions you probably won't answer.

Are you of the opinion that every question has a "yes" or "no" answer?

Are you of the opinion that the person who asks a question always has the authority to decide how it should be answered?

Why do you believe these things?

 

[Watchmen]

That literally makes zero sense.

I know you don't answer my questions - but I'll ask anyway.

If a salesman claimed that the snake-oil he was selling cured cancer and a cancer-patient was cured of his cancer after purchasing and using the snake-oil - you would still consider it immoral for the salesman to be paid for his snake-oil?

I'm gonna ask a couple more questions you probably won't answer.

Are you of the opinion that every question has a "yes" or "no" answer?

Are you of the opinion that the person who asks a question always has the authority to decide how it should be answered?

Why do you believe these things?

Yes. If the snakeoil salesman is a $100BILLION organization and is asking the recipient to give up 10% of his/her income forever (without really knowing if the product even works or not), that is immoral.

“yes/no” questions have a yes/no answer. When people go beyond it’s usually for some self-serving purpose. Or when they answer without using yes/no it’s usually because they are ashamed of the answer or want to hide the true answer - again, typically for self serving purposes.

Does the person asking the question have authority to decide how it’s answered? Sometimes.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Yes. If the snakeoil salesman is a $100BILLION organization and is asking the recipient to give up 10% of his/her income forever (without really knowing if the product even works or not), that is immoral.

Your answer invites other questions.

If the salesman was penniless - would you still consider it immoral?

I ask because you keep making it seem like the amount of money the person - or organization - has is crucial to your argument.

What if the salesman claims that he "believes" that the snake-oil would do as he describes and that only those who truly "believe" as he does should buy it?

You argue that any consumer who "believes" the same things about the snake-oil as the salesman has no right to buy the snake-oil?

And if they did - it would be immoral for the salesman to sell it to them?

The Church believes that paying tithes can lead to blessings in this life and exaltation in the life to come.

If someone - for whatever reason - begins to believe as the Church believes - you argue that it would be immoral for them to pay their tithing?

The only way your argument makes sense is if the Church is false.

Otherwise - it's all a bunch of consenting adults all agreeing about the same things and entering into voluntary transactions.

No one is being taken advantage of. No one is being forced to believe or do anything.

It can only be considered immoral if the Church is lying - which no one can ever prove - so you have nothing.

You have nothing but your subjective bias. Your opinion.

“yes/no” questions have a yes/no answer. When people go beyond it’s usually for some self-serving purpose. Or when they answer without using yes/no it’s usually because they are ashamed of the answer or want to hide the true answer - again, typically for self serving purposes.

Or - it is not as simple as you want it to be.

As you have repeatedly demonstrated - I don't have to answer your question at all.

I say be happy with what I gave you because I'm under no obligation to answer - let alone answer the way you want me to.

I clearly answered your question.

Does the person asking the question have authority to decide how it’s answered? Sometimes.

They do if they have a badge and if they have reasonable suspicion.

Do you have a badge? Is your suspicion reasonable?

 

[Watchmen]

Your answer invites other questions.

If the salesman was penniless - would you still consider it immoral?

I ask because you keep making it seem like the amount of money the person - or organization - has is crucial to your argument.

What if the salesman claims that he "believes" that the snake-oil would do as he describes and that only those who truly "believe" as he does should buy it?

You argue that any consumer who "believes" the same things about the snake-oil as the salesman has no right to buy the snake-oil?

And if they did - it would be immoral for the salesman to sell it to them?

The Church believes that paying tithes can lead to blessings in this life and exaltation in the life to come.

If someone - for whatever reason - begins to believe as the Church believes - you argue that it would be immoral for them to pay their tithing?

The only way your argument makes sense is if the Church is false.

Otherwise - it's all a bunch of consenting adults all agreeing about the same things and entering into voluntary transactions.

No one is being taken advantage of. No one is being forced to believe or do anything.

It can only be considered immoral if the Church is lying - which no one can ever prove - so you have nothing.

You have nothing but your subjective bias. Your opinion.

Or - it is not as simple as you want it to be.

As you have repeatedly demonstrated - I don't have to answer your question at all.

I say be happy with what I gave you because I'm under no obligation to answer - let alone answer the way you want me to.

I clearly answered your question.

They do if they have a badge and if they have reasonable suspicion.

Do you have a badge? Is your suspicion reasonable?

Your opinion that it is not immoral is a subjective belief based on you being a true believer.

You change the facts of the snakeoil salesman example to make it readily distinguishable from the reality of the Mormon church.

I gave it a shot and answered your questions but you continue to ignore my very simple question and fail to provide very simple answers.

In short, you have zero credibility. Everyone can see it but you and other blind followers of the Mormon “faith.”

People are required to answer my questions all the time. And I don’t have a badge.

Oh, and many people have proved that the Church lying, but blind true believers like you bury their head in the sand and deny. Kind of like you e done in this thread.

It’s also not about consenting adults. It’s coercion, perhaps even extortion.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Before I get to your new post I'm going to revisit something you said in the last post.

You said in Post #252,

"Yes. If the snakeoil salesman is a $100BILLION organization and is asking the recipient to give up 10% of his/her income forever (without really knowing if the product even works or not), that is immoral."

This is what faith is. Faith is not immoral.

The Church teaches its members to pay tithes because it believes that God has commanded it and members decide to pay because they have faith in the promises they believe came from God.

You don't know what faith is so it is no wonder why you left the Church.

It's all about faith.

Your opinion that it is not immoral is a subjective belief based on you being a true believer.

This is not accurate.

If any other religion were to ask their members to pay tithes in exchange for promised blessings - I'd have no issue with that.

I wouldn't believe those promised blessings would have the same validity as those taught by the Church - but I wouldn't consider the practice immoral.

The practice of tithing is not immoral.

It only becomes immoral - to you - when you apply your belief that the Church is a fraud.

Besides - if what you said were true - I could easily turn it around on you.

"Your opinion that it is immoral is a subjective belief based on you being a non-believer."

It's the very same argument. Does it hold weight?

You change the facts of the snakeoil salesman example to make it readily distinguishable from the reality of the Mormon church.

But you don't have facts or reality.

You don't know that the snake-oil salesman is a charlatan.

You don't know that the Church is lying.

You claiming that the Church is false does not make it so.

And your entire "tithing is immoral" argument hinges on that claim.

You assume the Church is lying.

You assume that that is a fact.

You assume that that is reality.

If the snake-oil does as describes - it's not immoral for the salesman to sell it.

I gave it a shot and answered your questions but you continue to ignore my very simple question and fail to provide very simple answers.

You keep lying.

I never once ignored your question.

I told you repeatedly that I had already answered it and that the answer is more complicated than a simple "yes" or "no".

In short, you have zero credibility. Everyone can see it but you and other blind followers of the Mormon “faith.”

Your entire argument relies on your bias and yet you claim that I am the one without credibility?

Why did you put faith in quotes?

Is that more of your bias showing forth?

People are required to answer my questions all the time. And I don’t have a badge.

No one is required to do anything you say.

Ego trip.

Oh, and many people have proved that the Church lying, but blind true believers like you bury their head in the sand and deny. Kind of like you e done in this thread.

No one has proved that the Church has lied about anything.

You claiming that my belief keeps me from seeing the truth is ironic considering that your unbelief is keeping you from seeing it.

It’s also not about consenting adults. It’s coercion, perhaps even extortion.

Nope. You don't know what those words mean.

 

[Watchmen]

No assumptions here. The Church has lied about a great many things, but you're a fanatic and incapable of admitting that.

Book of Abraham - demonstrably false.

Book of Mormon - demonstrably false.

Joseph Smith - don't get me started.

BUT, for the sake of argument, even if the Church were true, it's tithing practice is still immoral. Just because your god is "true," doesn't mean he's a good god.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

No assumptions here. The Church has lied about a great many things, but you're a fanatic and incapable of admitting that.

First off - no one has proven that any of the claims made the Church are untrue.

Second - even if the claims were proven to not be true - being proven wrong is not the same as lying.

That's just simple logic - which you seem to have a great need for - but no want.

Book of Abraham - demonstrably false.

I have yet to see anything that demonstrates that the Book of Abraham is false.

Yet - even if there was something that proved that - that doesn't mean the Church lied about it.

Feel free to offer any one of the evidences that proves the Book of Abraham false.

Book of Mormon - demonstrably false.

I have yet to see anything that demonstrates that the Book of Mormon is false.

Yet - even if there was something that proved that - that doesn't mean the Church lied about it.

Feel free to offer any one of the evidences that proves the Book of Mormon false.

Better yet - why not share it on that other thread I started where you claimed you would share your evidence?

Christians: The Book of Mormon

Joseph Smith - don't get me started.

Yes - he can be a loaded topic - what with his name being had for both good and evil in the world - to quote the angel Moroni.

I'm willing to see any one piece of evidence that proves him false too.

BUT, for the sake of argument, even if the Church were true, it's tithing practice is still immoral. Just because your god is "true," doesn't mean he's a good god.

What argument?

You've just been making unfounded claims again.

There is nothing immoral about paying tithing and God is both true and good.

Even if the salesman was a "bad guy" it is not immoral for him to sell a product that does as advertised.

Again - very simple logic - but you're in short supply - possibly running on empty.

 

[Clear]

@JesusKnowsYou said to Watchmen : "So - that's it - you finally admit it.

You believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a false church. That is the core of your "argument".

Otherwise you would not describe the Church as a "snake oil salesman". A charlatan or quack.

And I'm sure that you'd consider any "snake oil salesman" - either rich or poor - to be immoral.

No wonder you didn't want to answer my question about if you'd still consider the paying of tithes to be immoral if the Church had been penniless.

If you had answered that question truthfully - you would have said "Yes" because you believe the Church is false - thus making the subject of how much money the Church has irrelevant.

You kept mentioning the money to distract everyone from your actual "beef" with the Church.

So - this was never about the Church having $100 billion - but about you believing that the Church is false." (post #244


JesusKnowsYou : It seems to me that you exposed the Core motives and reasoning underlying Watchmens' posts. It seems that we are all seeing the textual tantrum of a disaffected prior member, with poor lawyering logic and lack of logical replies to your legitimate points.

The nature of this conversation reveals the underlying complaint was never about the amount of money an organization has to do good with, but it seems to be more a personal gripe.

For example, most individuals would agree that it is a GOOD thing for authentic charitable organisations that donate time and money to help sick and afflicted around the world regardless of religious or irreligious. l. Doing good is doing good regardless of who is doing it. To do good with money is good. To do a LOT of good with a LOT of money is good.

The fact that Watchmen is able, but unwilling to follow your logic and answer your logical questions to him says much regarding the actual motive underlying his complaints. It seems to be obvious to me that you are dealing with a a private gripe that is not based on logic and this is the reason you are not getting logical answers to the questions you're posing.

See you JesusKnowsYou.

Clear
τωσετωφιω

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

@JesusKnowsYou said to Watchmen : "So - that's it - you finally admit it.

You believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a false church. That is the core of your "argument".

Otherwise you would not describe the Church as a "snake oil salesman". A charlatan or quack.

And I'm sure that you'd consider any "snake oil salesman" - either rich or poor - to be immoral.

No wonder you didn't want to answer my question about if you'd still consider the paying of tithes to be immoral if the Church had been penniless.

If you had answered that question truthfully - you would have said "Yes" because you believe the Church is false - thus making the subject of how much money the Church has irrelevant.

You kept mentioning the money to distract everyone from your actual "beef" with the Church.

So - this was never about the Church having $100 billion - but about you believing that the Church is false." (post #244


JesusKnowsYou : It seems to me that you exposed the Core motives and reasoning underlying Watchmens' posts. It seems that we are all seeing the textual tantrum of a disaffected prior member, with poor lawyering logic and lack of logical replies to your legitimate points.

The nature of this conversation reveals the underlying complaint was never about the amount of money an organization has to do good with, but it seems to be more a personal gripe.

For example, most individuals would agree that it is a GOOD thing for authentic charitable organisations that donate time and money to help sick and afflicted around the world regardless of religious or irreligious. l. Doing good is doing good regardless of who is doing it. To do good with money is good. To do a LOT of good with a LOT of money is good.

The fact that Watchmen is able, but unwilling to follow your logic and answer your logical questions to him says much regarding the actual motive underlying his complaints. It seems to be obvious to me that you are dealing with a a private gripe that is not based on logic and this is the reason you are not getting logical answers to the questions you're posing.

See you JesusKnowsYou.

Clear
τωσετωφιω

Yes. Exactly. 100%.

 

[Watchmen]

Nope. Wrong. False or not, Mormon Church’s tithing requirement is immoral.