jon wrote:£11,000 wouldn't cover the travel costs of the six Mission Presidents in Great Britain and yet God's one true Church couldn't 'find' it in its collective heart to spend more than that on good causes in 2009.
What a hypocritical disgrace.
How much did you personally donate to UK humanitarian causes last year, jon? What percentage of your income was it? 1%? 5%? 10%? more than 15%?
I'd just like to know from what moral high ground you are able to pronounce the LDS Church's humanitarian contributions in the UK "a hypocritical disgrace."
jon wrote:£11,000 wouldn't cover the travel costs of the six Mission Presidents in Great Britain and yet God's one true Church couldn't 'find' it in its collective heart to spend more than that on good causes in 2009.
What a hypocritical disgrace.
How much did you personally donate to UK humanitarian causes last year, jon? What percentage of your income was it? 1%? 5%? 10%? more than 15%?
I'd just like to know from what moral high ground you are able to pronounce the LDS Church's humanitarian contributions in the UK "a hypocritical disgrace."
Doesn't the LDS Church claim to be lead by Jesus? Isn't Jesus the same guy who a: never asked for any money for himself and b: told people they should give EVERYTHING to the poor?
Is Jon claiming to be Jesus' representative on earth?
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
jon wrote:£11,000 wouldn't cover the travel costs of the six Mission Presidents in Great Britain and yet God's one true Church couldn't 'find' it in its collective heart to spend more than that on good causes in 2009.
What a hypocritical disgrace.
How much did you personally donate to UK humanitarian causes last year, jon? What percentage of your income was it? 1%? 5%? 10%? more than 15%?
I'd just like to know from what moral high ground you are able to pronounce the LDS Church's humanitarian contributions in the UK "a hypocritical disgrace."
Red Herring. One need not have donated to a charitable organization to make a judgment about its finances. I guarantee that many members believe that donations to humanitarian aid are actually being spent on humanitarian aid - so the information is relevant.
"I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. ... Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I." - Joseph Smith, 1844
Buffalo wrote:Isn't Jesus the same guy who a: never asked for any money for himself and b: told people they should give EVERYTHING to the poor?
Jesus' ministry was funded by donations (see Luke 8:1-3).
Jesus didn't give "everything" he had to the poor, and generally didn't require others to.
He accepted expensive gifts, acknowledging that they could have been used instead to help the poor (see, e.g., John 12:1-8). His instruction to his disciples was: "You always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them. But you will not always have me." (Mark 14:7).
Baker wrote:One need not have donated to a charitable organization to make a judgment about its finances.
What does this have to do with the thread?
Jon apparently believes that the Church's charitable contributions in the UK are insufficient. I am just wondering if he lives up to the standard he holds others to.
Baker wrote:I guarantee that many members believe that donations to humanitarian aid are actually being spent on humanitarian aid - so the information is relevant.
Sorry, but where is the evidence that donations to humanitarian aid aren't being spent on humanitarian aid?
The Church claims that "one hundred percent of the donations given to the Church’s humanitarian services are used for relief efforts." Can you show otherwise?
Nevo wrote: The Church claims that "one hundred percent of the donations given to the Church’s humanitarian services are used for relief efforts." Can you show otherwise?
Yes
In the published financial statements of the Church for the year ending December 2009: Humanitarian aid fund Donations received - £344,000 Expenditure - £11,000
Nevo, care to comment further?
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
Nevo wrote:Jon apparently believes that the Church's charitable contributions in the UK are insufficient. I am just wondering if he lives up to the standard he holds others to.
Every time I seek sponsorship for various events that I do to raise money for charitable UK causes I can guarentee that every single penny that people give me gets passed on.
The Church's charitable contributions in the UK in 2009 were £11,000 out of £30.7 million of donations. That's 0.04%. Yep, I'd say that was insufficient for God's one true Church, led by Christ.
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
Buffalo wrote:Isn't Jesus the same guy who a: never asked for any money for himself and b: told people they should give EVERYTHING to the poor?
Jesus' ministry was funded by donations (see Luke 8:1-3).
Jesus didn't give "everything" he had to the poor, and generally didn't require others to.
He accepted expensive gifts, acknowledging that they could have been used instead to help the poor (see, e.g., John 12:1-8). His instruction to his disciples was: "You always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them. But you will not always have me." (Mark 14:7).
A few points:
1) accepting food and lodging is different than what is accepted by the current corporate church
2) What did Jesus have to give?
3) Jesus accepted one expensive and perishable gift, in preparation for his death. Don't be disingenuous.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Nevo wrote: The Church claims that "one hundred percent of the donations given to the Church’s humanitarian services are used for relief efforts." Can you show otherwise?
Yes
In the published financial statements of the Church for the year ending December 2009: Humanitarian aid fund Donations received - £344,000 Expenditure - £11,000
Nevo, care to comment further?
It looks like the church is just sitting on the money. It's probably earning them interest.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Nevo wrote:Jon apparently believes that the Church's charitable contributions in the UK are insufficient. I am just wondering if he lives up to the standard he holds others to.
Every time I seek sponsorship for various events that I do to raise money for charitable UK causes I can guarentee that every single penny that people give me gets passed on.
The Church's charitable contributions in the UK in 2009 were £11,000 out of £30.7 million of donations. That's 0.04%. Yep, I'd say that was insufficient for God's one true Church, led by Christ.
The Target Corporation is more charitable than the LDS church. Sad but true.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.