Tuesday, March 27, 2012


One of my friends brought this to my attention about a month ago. I had to see if for myself before I posted anything about it. This is a scanned image of the tithing form we recieved this Sunday from the Young Men in our ward collecting Fast Offerings. It is a new form. No longer is it listed to donate to:
  • Temple construction
  • Perpetual education fund
  • Book of Mormon
I wonder if the Perpetual education fund as been disbanded and I am curious why contributions to Temple construction is no longer listed.

Oh, and you also are to put your Membership Record Number instead of your address.

But probably the most interesting change is the fine print. It says:

"Though reasonable efforts will be made globally to use donations as designated, all donations become the Church's property and will be used at the Church's sole discretion to further the Church's overall mission."

What does "reasonable efforts will be made" mean? Who determine's where it goes? Why wouldn't my donation be honored to the fullest in where I allocated my money? Why even list other categories to donate to if only reasonable efforts will be made?

So if I am reading this correctly, if I donate to the humanitarian aid...I am not guaranteed that it will go to help those in need. My money could end up being used for church building projects... or maybe used to beautify sacred surrounding areas of a Temple. Sounds like the money I designate as a faithful and active Latter-day Saint might get mingled into one large sum of money for the leaders to use where they see fit, and not where I would like to see it go. I am sure they know better than me where the money should go. No need to question, because we are promised that they can't be led astray.

Sidenote: I think this is important to point out:

The Church's Provident Living website has listed the combined total about of money given for the past 25 years (1985–2010) to Humanitarian aid of food, clothing, medical supplies,etc.given to the poor and needy in over 178 countries.

From the website:
  • Humanitarian assistance rendered  $1.3 billion
  • Countries and territories served 178
  • Food 63,377 tons
  • Medical supplies 14,345 tons
  • Clothing 93,196 tons
  • Hygiene, newborn, and school kits 11.1 million

 1.3 billion  in over 25 years?. Some would say that is wonderful. We are a generous people that help the poor and the needy. That is roughly 52 million dollars a year.

However, when you compare that to the 5,000,000,000.00 dollars that we have spend on one shopping mall, luxurious condominums, and office buildings in an already affluent city... it makes you wonder what we love more. I think the Book of Mormon foresaw that we would love more.
"For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted."

So, it is not that we don't love the poor and the needy, ..  we do! But what do we love MORE? If you take the dollar amount totals as an indication on what is percieved as  more important, (Humanitarian versus the City Creek Center project) it looks like is would be the City Creek Center almost 4 to1.

We commonly attribute in the above scripture as Moroni referring to other religions.. but looking at this more closing, it might be referring to us.


Anonymous said...

Time to start giving elsewhere so we at least know where our contributions have gone?

Anonymous said...

I personally believe in giving my money directly to the widows & fatherless around me, if I thought the Church might use that money to build a 'mall' or business venture instead.

God commands me to 1st follow what the scriptures teach, before following any church leader, for all church leaders can & do error.

All Church leaders & Prophets have to 'prove' they are really righteous & are protecting & caring for the Saints, especially all women & children (widows & the fatherless especially) before anyone is obligated, let alone safe, to listen to or follow them.

If leaders don't follow the scriptures, I am commanded not to follow those leaders.

It is 'not true' that Prophets can't lead us astray. They can & have many times before. Prophets can fall & have fallen & can & will lead astray all those who don't have the Holy Spirit as their guide.

It is up to us to be able to discern truth from error & false doctrine & deeds from true doctrine & Christlike works.

It is the test of this life, to be able to discern 'true' prophets from 'false' prophets, even in & especially in, the Church.

Ben said...

My guess on the disclaimer is that its for legal reasons to keep donations tax deductible across the board. The missionary funds had a similar disclaimer before, didn't they?

For non-tithing and non-fast offering contributions, I'd almost rather have a bunch of blank "other" lines, and a small footnote on the form with a list of all the accounts possible to donate to. There isn't really room on the form for all the possible accounts to have their own slot, so why not list what's available and let us fill in the blank?

The contrast between humanitarian aid and city creek is much more disturbing to me, and something that I guess not many people want to think about.

I pointed out the difference in amounts on a popular BYU sports message board and got banned for 3 days for "criticizing the brethren." Quoting Nephi is now offensive to the average Saint, I guess.

Anonymous said...

Yes Ben, unfortunately speaking the truth will usually get you quickly 'cast out' & banned from most popular LDS related websites.

Very few members are willing to actually study, accept & live the real truth & the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

"They honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me."

Anonymous said...

Something's rotten in Denmark. I'm still paying tithing however. Just to get to the temple. And I believe my kids are better off in than out. Regardless of the level of hypocrisy or whatever else is going on.

Anonymous said...

Where did you get the picture download of the tithing slip? I cannot find an announcement, picture or any information about this on lds.org and we don't currently use that form in our ward so I'm naturally a little curious to see it for myself. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

I didn't download it. I have the tithing slip here on my desk. I think once your ward runs out, these are the new slip that come when you Executive Secretary orders more.

I scanned the picture. I too was skeptical until I saw it this Sunday when the YM came around with fast offerings. It was printed on 11/11. So this has come out after last General Conference.

Anonymous said...

Our ward is still using the old slips.

Anonymous said...

So my tithing might be used for anything they want and the same with fast offerings for the poor and needy? Why?

Anonymous said...

If ALL donations includes fast offerings than yes, the fine print states that the church can use the funds else where to further the mission of the CHURCH.

Not sure why.

John and Jennifer said...

Thanks for finding the stats on the humanitarian donations. I wonder how this compares with other big corporations like Wal-Mart.

Anonymous said...

I can tell you who decides where you donations go - The Council on the Disposition of the Tithes, which is composed of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, although I'm guessing you probably already knew that.

However, this is one of the quandaries church members find themselves in: Because the President of the Church is sustained as a "prophet" as are the other members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, members are either unwilling or very reluctant to raise their voices in concern over the way church funds are being spent. I mean, we've been told that a prophet can never lead the people astray, right? And, our children are indoctrinated with "follow the prophet" and adults are told that the "debate is over" once the prophet has spoken. These teachings make it very difficult for any faithful member to raise a voice of warning or concern.

In a recent ward conference, I wanted to vote against sustaining the members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve solely on the basis of the extravagance of the City Creek Center. It was my wife who asked me not to to save her the embarrassment of having her husband quizzed regarding his negative vote. Because she is more valuable to me than the church's top brass, I simply abstained from voting.

You can see how difficult these issues can be to confront head on. How does one work to point out things that do not seem to be in line with the Lord's teachings without being accused of being an "ark steadier"? At this point, I do not know the answers, but I appreciate the insight your blog provides and I look forward to further posts.

Best wishes.

Inspire said...

Though reasonable efforts will be made to donate my tithing to the church, all donations are the Lord's property and will be used at the Spirit's sole discretion to further the Lord's mission of giving succor to those in need.

Anonymous said...

Which mission as we currently see can include an extravagant shopping mall, that caters to the wealthy.

Anonymous said...

Since there has been a change in the legal wording/scripts of how donated funds are able to be used, which version are they abiding by? The old one? Or the new one?

When you change legal stuff like that about distribution of funds, I do see the problem of then having to get rid of all the told tithing slips and give every ward new ones. That's a huge pain. But I also see the misleading that occurs when they don't. Cause then the disclosure on the old slips misleads.

This is probably a nit picky issues but I am glad I don't have to be the one to deal with it.

Anonymous said...

How dare the church ever build a non church building!

Anonymous said...

The comments here are ridiculous. Just saying. You people have some serious issues.

Inspire said...

I'm assuming that remark was sarcastic. Hey, if the church were to be spending the 5 billion on buildings that helped the poor and needy, then I'd be all for it. But where in the 4 fold mission of the church does it talk about taking sacred funds to increase the bottom line of Nordstroms and Tiffanys?

Inspire said...

These are hard things to hear. They certainly don't give us "warm fuzzies," do they? More like it cuts us to the very center.

Anonymous said...

You do realize that NO tithing funds went into the CCC? Donations are kept in a seperate pool from profits derived from the church's money making enterprises such as radio stations, etc...
I think the disclaimer was to throw off Utah Fans from being able to stipulate that none of their donations can go to BYU.

Anonymous said...

What a bunch of whiners...

Anonymous said...

Oh no! Someone call the whaaaambulance!

Anonymous said...

Seriously all of these replies, save only a few, demonstrate a weak kneed group of doubting Thomas'. You all really don't understand the financial structure of the church and how dilapidated the downtown sector of SLC had become, and how that has negatively impacted Temple Square. This new "extravagant" mall is a great attraction which will bear it's own financial weight and will serve the mission of the church by generating more positive activity right across the street from Temple Square. This is a great missionary tool and a great beautification project which will not COST the church, but will be a great "investment."

But if you insist in losing your testimony over it... Well then methinks you have precious little to lose.

Peace. :)

Anonymous said...

It's easy to cut to the center of a Twinkie! Toughen up.

Inspire said...

Holy, holy God; we believe that thou art God, and we believe that thou art holy...we believe that thou hast separated us from our brethren and that our holy temple is now protected... we believe that thou hast elected us to be thy holy children of Zion, and that we have the right to spend thine usury however we deem fit. Thou art the same yesterday, today, and forever; and thou hast elected us that we shall be saved, whilst all around us are elected to be cast by thy wrath down to hell and Pioneer Park; for the which holiness, O God, we thank thee; and we also thank thee that thou hast elected us, that we may not be led away after the foolish traditions of the prophets as revealed in the Book of Mormon. They are bound down to belief in a Christ who came to heal the sick and afflicted, which doth lead their hearts to wander far from thee, OUR God. Our counsels are hidden from them and from thee, Holy God, because only we comprehend the financial structure of our great city.

And again we thank thee, O God, that we are a chosen and a holy people. Let us mock those who murmur against our fine sanctuaries and our great and spacious buildings. Now we say unto thee and unto all, let us go shopping. Amen.

LJn said...

Very well said, Inspire.

The problem, Mr/Ms Anonymous is that this is supposed to be the church of Jesus Christ, not the church of the Brethren. The Brethren are supposed to be accountable to the people.
The Brethren are supposed to be concentrating on following Jesus, not following mammon.
The Brethren are supposing to be preaching repentance, not building schools, expensive malls, and having their fingers in other moneymaking pies.

There is a scripture in the Doctrine and Covenants that tells what to do if the President of the High Priesthood is found a transgressor (I'm not saying he is; my point is that if God put it there it must mean it's possible for the president to make some pretty serious mistakes). The fact that it's there means that God expects the people these men are supposed to serve to keep an eye open to the doings of these men.

64 Then comes the High Priesthood, which is the greatest of all.
65 Wherefore, it must needs be that one be appointed of the High Priesthood to preside over the priesthood, and he shall be called President of the High Priesthood of the Church;
66 Or, in other words, the Presiding High Priest over the High Priesthood of the Church. [In other words, the president of the church.]

76 But a literal descendant of Aaron has a legal right to the presidency of this priesthood, to the keys of this ministry, to act in the office of bishop independently, without counselors, except IN A CASE where a President of the High Priesthood, after the order of Melchizedek, IS TRIED, to sit as a judge in Israel.

82 And *inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood shall transgress*, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;
83 And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.
84 Thus, *none shall be exempted* from the justice and the laws of God, that all things may be done in order and in solemnity before him, according to truth and righteousness.

LJn said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LJn said...

I forgot to mention the section, sorry.

D&C 107

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:52,

I believe the scriptures teach that God commands us to better the position of the 'widows & the fatherless' among us in the Church, who are being ignored by the leaders of the Church, far before improving the area around a temple.

For the Church or temple will have little meaning or effect in our lives & missionary efforts, if we don't 1st put the welfare, care & support of all the widows & fatherless before anything else we do in the Church or do with our money.

LJn said...

Looks like there may be some shills in this comment section.

[quote]The City Creek multi-billion dollar project has excited a lot of criticism. The result has been dismay by many faithful Latter-day Saints. Their anxiety over the project has become the subject of many conversations on the Internet.

To grapple with this outpouring of criticism and in some cases disgust, the church has paid employees and volunteers who post on-line responses using personas, or anonymous identities to beat back those who express concern. Many of the multiple personas are put up by the same church employee.

The arguments advanced by those who are concerned about the investment in the City Creek shopping center most often cite scripture. Their observations are based on sincere belief, supported by positions taken from scripture study, and reflect honest concern. The defense is based on the concept of supporting the leadership, sustaining the church's prophet, and uses comments taken from church talks, sermons, etc.

The gulf between these two positions is one of the great divisions in the church today. The numbers of those holding these two positions are not equal, however. The one is held by sincere, believing members of the church who honestly disagree with the use of these funds for this elaborate, costly project. The other is advanced for the most part by paid employees or volunteers who are doing so using multiple personas to justify the church's conduct.

I'd like readers to note I've not taken a position in this post. It does not deal with anything other than the events unfolding and how the reactions are being advanced and defended. Nothing more.[/quote]

Read the whole post here:

Anonymous said...

wow. Maturity level is lacking anon. At least say something of value, even if your view is different than anyone else here. We'll respect a mature point of view. But baby talk isn't impressive at all.

Anonymous said...

How can you be so sure? Is that just because the brethren say so?

Their complete unwillingness to engage in any kind of financial transparency means there is no way to honestly say what funds went into the City Creek Center. Unless you have some unique insights that you are willing to share, you really have no way to make the statement you made.

Anonymous said...

If we are to judge our leaders by their 'fruits', (vital things like how they handle the money, their political views & who they support & their actions in regards to marriage, divorce, remarriage, spouse abuse, etc. etc.) how can we do so if they keep these things hidden?

For the scriptures teach that it's not what a person 'says'(at a pulpit or writes in a book) but what a person 'does' that proves if they are righteous or not.

We need to be able to see their 'actions', their 'fruits', in order to know for sure that they are righteous & safe to follow.

Anonymous said...

Look at President Monson's life. He is an example of righteous living. He always responds to the needs of those around him. Your speculations and doubts are not founded on truth. If you keep saying, "How do we know...? What if... what if...?", you will never have the faith necessary for salvation.

Inspire said...

It has been made abundantly clear that President Monson has come "to the rescue" of many a widow. We hear about it in conference and read about it in his books. In fact, President Packer said, "He is more Christlike than the rest of us."

What sort of "faith" are you referring to? Faith in man that they are spending the sacred funds wisely? Faith in a man that he is more righteous than the rest of us? Faith in an organization that runs counter to the teachings taught in the scriptures? Indeed, faith in a structure that is fulfilling prophecy in that it is descriptive of the Great and Abominable Church?

If that is the faith which is required "for salvation," then sign me up for hell. No, my faith is in Christ. My faith is in His mercy offered freely to a wretch like myself. My faith is not in a program or organization, but in the Son of God. I do not speculate, doubt or deny His saving power. As amazing as President Monson is, he is a man. I will turn my faith to Christ and love HIM with all my heart, might, mind and strength. That is the truth I am founded in.

Anonymous said...

We are not to have 'faith' that a man or prophet is righteous, we are to make sure we have 'proof' that he is, before we are to follow him.

No matter how many widows and fatherless Pres. Monson has taken care of personally, I can only judge Pres. Monson's actions by if he has cared for the widows and fatherless I have known in the Church.

He is responsible and accountable for 'all' the widows and fatherless, church wide. I do not see the widows and fatherless being taken care of and protected like they should be or at all.

Taking care of a few while leaving the rest to fend for themselves, especially when you have the means to take care of them, is not righteous.

LJn said...

AnonymousApr 5, 2012 09:13 AM - "Look at President Monson's life. He is an example of righteous living."

Yes, and we have been told how wonderful he is so many times that, according to the scriptures, "He has his reward."

What happened to the teaching of Jesus that our right hand should not know what our left hand is doing, when it comes to doing good? We are not to sound our good works from the rooftops and the street corners so that everyone can hear them, yet I went to a stake conference a year or two ago wherein the visiting authority pretty much gave a eulogy for our beloved president. He was even compared to Christ, doing "what Christ would have done" which was to take a dear sister's hand (she was suffering from poor health, I forget exactly what), and give her words of comfort. Had I been eating or drinking, I probably would have spewed it out. Jesus would NOT have done that! Jesus would have HEALED her! I seriously don't get all these people who are, for all intents and purposes, worshiping a man.

LJn said...

Anonymous, we love you anyway. Notice, will you, that up til now no one has responded to your silly reply.

LJn said...

And this adds to the conversation how?

LJn said...

Anon of Mar 30: Out of curiosity, why did you (and your other whining friends) come onto this thread to add absolutely nothing of intelligence to the discussion? Are you part of the group who was told to defend the mall?

Excellent points, Anon of Mar 31.

Brandon Mysliwiec said...

Your all just being dumb and blowing things way out of proportion. The City Creek Project was not built by the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" it was built by the real estate division, a business investment division of the church that has always handle the realty side of the church for the "for profit" portions of the company as well as the acquisition of property for the "non-profit" side of the church. The church NEVER has nor will they ever use sacred donation funds for the business side of the church. Those funds come strictly from the investments and business properties and entities that the church owns.

As for the tithing slip, what the heck is up all of your butts? So what if the form was changed, its a legal issue that the portion at the bottom was added. It always has and always will be up to the church will donated funds are used, now they just put it directly on the donation form for legal issues. If the prophet, his apostles, or any other priesthood holder with authority to do so is inspired by the spirit to use the funds for something other then what was originally noted on a tithing slip then who are YOU to justify saying it is wrong?

As long as a prophet is acting in the authority of a Prophet then we will NEVER be lead astray, we are promised that, anyone who thinks differently is fooling themselves into justifying why they are not following all that our prophets have told us to do.

Stop nitpicking the church, follow the commandments and ALL that the Prophets tell us to do. Pick the side of the fence your going to be on, you cannot sit in the middle.

Inspire said...

First of all, you may or may not know this, but by the juvenile use of name-calling and judging those with valid concerns, you lessen the weight of your position and only validate the fulfillment of the "All is well in Zion" mentality, and the pride that goes with it.

Secondly, you state that the church will never use sacred funds for "the business side" of the church. At what point do "sacred" funds become non-sacred? You are implying that there is a distinction between the two. Sacred vs. business. Are you saying that the church can take any funds it deems as non-sacred and use it towards any venture they feel is a good "investment"? At that point it just becomes a matter of semantics. So here's what happens. They say, "Okay, the tithing money is 'sacred,' so let's put it in an account and hold it there. Wow, that's a lot of 'funds,' isn't it? Let's let it build up interest for three years by letting it just sit there. Sweet! Look at all that interest we 'earned.' We sure could use that elsewhere. How could we use it? In the 'market'. Why would we do that? To make more 'funds." Hey, let's call those funds something other than 'sacred' so that we can feel good about using the money however we feel is appropriate. Oh, and let's close the books to the public so there will be no accountability whatsoever. Now, when we talk about building malls or funding hunting retreats that are 'for profit,' we can tell everyone that no 'sacred' funds were used, because once we earned interest, they became 'non-sacred' or 'business' funds. If they ask questions, we tell them to 'trust us,' because we are called of God, and He will direct us in our 'stewardship' of this money. Of course, we shouldn't remind anyone that Joseph Smith was about the worst businessman you can imagine and that he failed over and over in business practices. So the inspiration thing didn't work for him. But hey, we're smarter than that now, as we have inspired businessmen scattered all throughout the Corporation. Wait, if business=non-sacred, than what is a 'businessman'? Um..... Follow the Prophet! He knows the way!!!! Yeah, that's it."

Lastly, most people who read this probably have researched where the whole "we will never be lead astray" mantra came from. You may want to do a little research on that yourself. Regardless, "commandments" are not marching orders barked by the ranking member of a hierarchy (those would be more like 'demandments'). A commandment is a trust entreated by a loving Father... a stewardship He commends to us. So if the choice is between God and mammon (or 'sacred' and 'business'), you're right, we can't sit on the fence. There is only one Master we can serve. Which one will it be?

Anonymous said...

I am commanded 'not' to go by what people 'say' about Pres. Monson, to judge whether he is a true prophet or not.

I am commanded to go by what I see him 'do', especially in reference to the women & children he is responsible to protect & care for in the church.

I see that he supports the 'abandonment of spouses & children' and he supports 'unjustified divorce and remarriage', which Christ says is adultery. Which causes severe abuse and suffering to women and children.

I see that many, if not most, of the widows and fatherless in the Church are not being cared for as they should by the Church, which is Pres. Monson's #1 responsibility.

I see that women are not usually being respected and protected by the Church from abuse, adultery and abandonment, which again, it's leaders #1 responsibility, high or low, or nothing else they do will matter much.

For until marriage & women are protected and respected and care for, there is no hope for the Church or society.

Until I see Pres. Monson change these things and stand for right, no amount of praise for him or flowery testimony from him, can cause me to trust or believe he is a true prophet.

For by his 'actions', specifically 'the protect of women and children' you will know him.

Anonymous said...


It appears you have not studied Church History enough or you would not fall for the blatant falsehood that "prophets can't lead us astray".

They can & they have, many times since Joseph.

Even Joseph Smith made errors & had to learn line upon line, and even called at least 1 false prophet to be an Apostle. (Bennett)

Heavenly Father allows prophets the same agency to error or fall as the rest of us. And if people don't live worthy of the Spirit nor study their scriptures, he allows them to be led astray by the falsehoods or false prophets.

That myth that 'prophets can't lead us astray' is actually one of the devil's favorite 'philosophies of men' that he gets church leaders to fall for & falsely teach. It has worked in many religions to led people astray. For that philosophy in fact, very quickly lulls people to sleep and causes them to not question everything a prophet does & says like we are commanded to. It thus quickly leads people astray because they don't watch & catch the errors their leaders make.

Those who follow their church leaders 'blindly & unquestioningly', usually never know they are being led astray, it until it's everlastingly too late to wake up.

We must study church history or we will be doomed to repeat it.

Inspire said...

Good thoughts. One need only look to the recent conference for a case-in-point (Elder Perry's talk). While he qualified most of his thoughts with "I believe," (do apostles or prophets even ever speak, "Thus sayeth the Lord" anymore?), most members take these things as authoritative and never even question it.

Elder Perry said, “Why is it important to for the world to have both the Bible and the Book of Mormon? I believe the answer is found in the 13th chapter of 1st Nephi:
And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records, which thou hast seen among the Gentiles (that is the Book of Mormon), shall establish the truth of the first (which is the Bible), which are of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things ...”

After five minutes of actually looking at the text in the Book of Mormon, one can easily realize that Elder Perry's opinion is a blatant misreading of the passage. The “last records” are NOT the Book of Mormon. The B of M is referred to as “much of my gospel” in this passage. The “last records” are what come AFTER the fullness of the Book of Mormon is revealed AND the Book of the Lamb of God is restored. Likewise, the “truth of the first” is definitely not the Bible as we have it today. If anything, the KJ Bible is part of the Great and Abominable Church (see 1 Ne 13:28-29).

My point isn't to go off subject, but to show how even today, the opinions of the 12 are perceived as THE authority. I don't blame them for not having time to really dig into the doctrinal stuff, because most of their time is spent overseeing boards and in organizational matters. But each individual who takes the Spirit for their guide, will not be deceived. If we take men for our guide, we will be lead away by their philosophies and errors.

Toni said...

Like Inspire said, "most people who read this probably have researched where the whole "we will never be lead astray" mantra came from."

I expect many or most of us have studied church history; we've seen the ugly as well as the pretty. We still have our testimonies of Jesus Christ and of the fact that this is His church, but we harbor no illusions about the perfection of the organization nor any of it's members (including the leaders).

For myself, I sustain the brethren at the top; they have the right to be there and to make decisions, but they are answerable to the people according to the law of common consent in the scriptures.

Anonymous said...


I agree that we need only look to our General Conferences today to see that errors are often taught. For almost every Conference there are some false doctrines taught, if you look & listen close enough to catch them. Sometimes they are major falsehoods that really lead people to do great evil. Other times they are minor errors that everyone makes.

Does that mean that when the Prophet or Apostles or G.A.s make minor errors they are a false prophet? No. But when they teach major falsehoods that cause people to sin, maybe.

But it does mean and show that we are responsible for discerning truth from error and right from wrong, even while listening to Conference. For no one is perfect, except Christ.

Thanks for your comments inspire!

Thanks to you too Toni. I'm glad to hear others have studied out where this false idea came from, that 'prophets can't lead us astray'.

For even BY said it with an 'if' clause, that we can't be led astray 'if' we are doing our duty (living worthy of the spirit). For then we will be able to detect any errors spoken by prophets and thus 'can't be led astray', cause we will know not to follow them.

But other church leaders since BY taught the idea but 'without' the 'if' clause, which makes all the difference.

Pres. Woodruff, was desperate to get men who lived polygamy to stop it, and thus he tried to get their confidence by saying that he couldn't lead them astray. But he left out the vital 'if' clause. So it gave the wrong impression to the church ever after. But he got them to stop polygamy and that's probably why he left out the 'if' clause.

Anonymous said...

You all may or may not know this, but Brandon Mysliwiec is a thief and a liar. Not too long ago he had a company named BK Industries, and an online DBA called "Paracord Master". He was taking orders for product, charging peoples credit cards, then not shipping the product. He has, to date, been fined over $80k by the UDCP...with more on the way. The authorities are still looking into criminal charges for fraud, among others.

Basically, the reason he supports the church's indiscretions is because that's how he runs his life & so-called "businesses".

Anonymous said...

Amazing Brandon that you speak of the commandments when you yourself dont follow them. Thou shall not steal is one of the ones my God told me about. You have stolen many hundreds of thousands of dollars from good hard working people the trusted your business, Paracord Masters aka BK Intustries. They gave you their hard earned money and you gave them nothing. You yourself said you have over 5000 people to give money back to, I being one of those, and yet you say in the papers, I will just bankrupt the company and oh well to those people (not a direct quote but the gist of it) You need to ask God for forgiveness for stealing from these 5000 people, I for one will only forgive when I see that you truly are sorry and give me my money back.

Anonymous said...

@ Inspire: Amen!!! I feel that my trust in the wise and sacred use of the money I believed I was returning to the Lord, in order to help the hurting and glorify the Father, has been betrayed. I take my responsibility of tithe-paying very seriously and personally; I have to know that it is being used in accordance with Heavenly Father's will. So far as "no tithing money was used for the City Creek Center..." - all Church money is sacred and set aside to be used in God's name for his purpose. No one has the right to separate Church money into different pots, some sacred and some not.

Anonymous said...

I will say this- If Brandon has anything to do with money and your Temple, don't tithe anything. It will most likely be used for legal expenses and fines.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

There are definite upsides to raising children in the church. But please still be wary. Teach your children at home every. single. day. and study the scriptures with them, and talk with them. I thought we were doing a great job with our children, but my 11-year-old daughter (who is very shy) recently wrote out her testimony, and it was this:

"I know President Monson is a prophet, and I know the church is true."

Ouch. Score one for Correlation. :(

Anonymous said...

Precisely, Inspire. We could be building halfway houses for nonviolent offenders (the US's recidivism rates are abominable, but with halfway houses, it drops miraculously), funding orphanages (like the Hand of Help's orphanage in Romania that's under threat of closure due to recent taxation changes), sending out armies of funded senior missionaries who can dig wells and provide clean water in the third world, where water is a fierce battle and often costs extravagant amounts of money. We could be feeding and housing and teaching the sick and downtrodden, those who just need to be loved. We could be building Youth Hostels and not-for-profit rec centers in harsh climate communities so community members could have access to wholesome and health-improving exercise year round, building relationships and making a meaningful strike against internet addictions and violent gaming. We could be feeding the 9 million malnourished children of LDS FAMILIES in the United States.

I guess providing jobs in downtown SLC is really more important . . .

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2:02, I agree, and would add that until EVERY bishop and stake president has received extensive training in pron addiction recovery, that women and children are not being protected. A beloved friend of mine recently went through a divorce, which I recently discovered she was counseled to do BY OUR BISHOP, after giving her husband only three months to "kick" a nearly-lifetime enslavement to pornography. That family was destroyed--utterly blasted to pieces--because we have a bishop ignorant of what it really takes to be released from that kind of slavery, and who isn't able to place hands on that good brother's head and break off the power of the evil that holds him bound. I know several families whose husbands/fathers have overcome such an addiction, and it was something that took a great deal of time, and a great deal of power from heaven. Those families are eternal ones . . . and it breaks my heart to see my friend and her children, who are happier on the surface now that they have some distance from the problem, and know that her eternal companion has been abandoned with nothing but broken promises.