While on my mission almost 50 years ago, I thought I was pretty smart. I belonged to a church that had all the answers! Thus as a representative of that Church, I had all the answers. Now I didn’t know much about the Bible, but that didn’t matter, because we had three other books that could answer the questions. So when talking to people, and they would bring up some Bible verse to make a point, I could counter with a Book of Mormon verse to make my point. We have other scriptures that supplement the Bible, and by following these we can know God’s will.
In the years since then, I have come to learn that there are a lot of scriptures in the LDS Standard Works that even the most believing members don’t believe and/or follow. While it is easy to find crazy stuff in the Bible, both Old and New Testament, these are easily dismissed by apologist as either old law of Moses stuff, or bad translations.
Some of the stuff that jumps out is requiring a man to pay 50 shekels to the father of a woman that he raped, then he has marry her. In the New Testament, Luke 12: 47-48 says that if a slave/servant (1) fails to do their duty, they should be “beaten with many blows”. But if the same slave/servant did so because they didn’t know better, then you only beat them with a few blows.
Let’s not dwell on the Bible, but look at the Book or Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price. These are all Modern revelation, and would not be subject to translations errors like the Bible, since Joseph Smith was the translator of the BofM and Pearl of Great Price.
Some of the easy ones are the Word of Wisdom in D&C 89:17. Here the Lord approves beer as part of the Word of Wisdom.
Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.
In D&C 124: 89 God commanded the JST to be published. That never happened. This just wasn’t a good idea. The section opens with the words “Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Joseph Smith”. Pretty hard to get out of that.
Now lets look at a doozy. Moses 7:22:
And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.
The idea of the curse of Cain being black skin was invented in America to justify slavery. It is not Biblical. This teaching of Cain’s descendants having black skin is not found anywhere else in the scriptures – just the Pearl of Great Price. When was the last time somebody read that in verse in Church? In fact the church has come out and said “Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse…”. Yet the verse remains in the book of Moses. It was skipped over in the Come Follow Me lesson on Moses 7.
What are some other verses in the LDS cannon that we don’t believe, don’t follow, or conveniently skip over when they come up in the yearly Sunday curriculum? Maybe the easiest way to find these types of scriptures is to see what verses are left out of the lesson manual (D&C 132 anybody?)
(1) some translations use slave, others servant.
Wheat & Tares 
The lesson in Come Follow Me for today includes Mosiah 4:16-19, and the next time I see it covered in a Gospel Doctrine lesson will be the first (seriously, even the manual itself doesn’t emphasize it), because the idea of helping the poor freely and without preconditions—that none of us ever actually earned either our wealth or our poverty—is absolute anathema to the majority of our church membership:
16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.
17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—
18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.
19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?
Those are some of my favorite verses JB. Once mentioned them to a former bishop who immediately said that we don’t follow that because it’s hurtful to give people what they ask for (I guess the bishop has to judge what everyone actually needs and they have to comply with his rules to receive it). I personally disagree.
So here are the verses that blew my mind when I read them for the first time when I was 56 years old after being a member of the church all my life. In all that time I had never even heard the name Huldah. See 2 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 34.
Huldah was a prophetess so respected that King Josiah sent his most respected advisors and emissaries to her to get her advice on what to do with some old scrolls he found. Josiah tells them “Go inquire of the Lord”
Huldah the prophetess is a married woman that lives in the college in Jerusalem.
She examines the scrolls and says “Thus saith the Lord God of Israel” and tells Josiah to stop the people from worshipping other Gods. Very very authoritative. So the Come Follow Me manages to teach this by praising Josiah up and down for following Huldah’s directions without ever mentioning her name.
Mind blowing for me.
Incidentally, LDS feminists avoid this verse too because Huldah is basically telling Josiah to stop worshipping Heavenly Mother.
The scriptures aren’t some simple book with clear directions for us to live by. To make meaning out of them we have to wrestle with them and decide what to ignore and what to follow. That’s reality, whether we like it or not.
How about D&C 111? When is that last time you heard a lesson in Gospel Doctrine class either on the follies of Joseph Smith or on the big gold and silver bonanza from Salem that the church received in due time or even how studying the history of the founders of Salem resulted in profound insights? I just don’t recall this section ever being a serious course of discussion.
1 I, the Lord your God, am anot displeased with your coming this journey, notwithstanding your follies.
2 I have much atreasure in this city for you, for the benefit of Zion, and many people in this city, whom I will gather out in due time for the benefit of Zion, through your instrumentality.
3 Therefore, it is expedient that you should form aacquaintance with men in this city, as you shall be led, and as it shall be given you.
4 And it shall come to pass in due time that I will agive this city into your hands, that you shall have power over it, insomuch that they shall not bdiscover your secret parts; and its wealth pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours.
And then again there are Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham. I don’t think there have been a lot of lessons around Joseph’s interpretation of these lately either. My guess is that the Q15 kind of regret the GT essays on this topic and probably would have preferred to remove the facsimiles if they could not draw attention to it.
I just hope and pray that the 1995 Family Proclamation does not get any further elevated status.
At one point I thought that polygamy was one of those things we don’t believe anymore, but then I realized how wrong I was on that one. It’s definitely kept quiet but has certainly not been relegated to the dustbin.
With JB I also suspect that much of the Book of Mormon has moved into the category of things we don’t believe anymore. I read it recently and was astounded that a church that votes the way it does has this as its scripture. As well as so many passages in the Bible.
I think it is easy to ignore odd things in the Old Testament. There is so much odd stuff there. But when it is in the New Testament, we really shouldn’t ignore it. Anna in the NT is named as a prophet, but when we talk about her and Simon, he is a prophet and she is a righteous faithful woman. His importance is exaggerated and hers in minimized.
There is even outright denial that a woman could be anything resembling a prophet. The Bible uses the word “prophet” which in most translations but English has no different feminine form. So, English speakers try to say a prophetess is totally different than a prophet, but yeah, only difference is she is a woman. No difference in how they talk to God.
And there is never any discussion of several hints in the New Testament that women held the priesthood during the early church. There is a female deacon, and apostle. Try bringing Junia up in Sunday school.
Several times in the New Testament there is mention of reincarnation, and Jesus never corrects the belief. Yet modern Christians just ignore that the apostles clearly believed in reincarnation and Jesus doesn’t correct them. When the disciples asked, who sinned that this man was born blind. Him in a previous life, his parents, or who? And Jesus doesn’t dispute that he might have sinned in a previous life, just says that as t the purpose of him being born blind. Jesus just says that he was born blind so you could learn compassion. In other words, stop worrying about judging sin and help. So, two things there Mormons miss, helping instead of judging and reincarnation. Jesus did not correct the idea of sin in a previous life and kind of by definition the pre-existence is not a place one can sin, so they are asking about reincarnation. And another place in the NT, Jesus asks them “who do men say that I am?” And they answer in ways that demonstrate belief in reincarnation. Jesus did not correct the belief in reincarnation, just asked them who they thought he was. Reincarnation as a Christian belief was ended by order of a Roman Emperor. He didn’t want to come back as a slave or so peasant so, he ordered the pope to change what the church taught or probably be executed. Thus, we don’t believe in reincarnation.
D&C 132 is pretty much a minefield: polygamy, women as property, calling and election made sure, prohibition of polyandry, wife is destroyed and law of Sarah nullified if she says no. I feel sorry for the poor curriculum writer who gets that assignment.
Here’s a kind of silly (with all due respect) one: How many members of the Church really believe in Adam-Ondi-Ahman / Missouri? Do they really believe that’s where it all started and that’s where it’s going to end up?
Here’s a really serious one: How many members really believe in RMN’s sad heaven description? Do they really believe the only family members who will be together are those who were on the covenant path via temple ordinances? (note: I realize that the HUGE safety valve in this is all the temple work done for those who didn’t have the chance. But still).
No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood
No Seventy who has given a “follow the brethren” talk in conference actually believes this.
Josh h
Unfortunately, we really do believe in sad heaven because we really do believe in prophetic authority. I have received personal revelation that my kids are going to be just fine. I have studied and found I believe in the fallibility of our prophets. I thought I was safe from teachings of sad heaven by prophetic authority. Wrong.
“Think Celestial” still really really hurt me, even though I didn’t expect it to. I tried to avoid feeling hurt by that authority, but when you have been taught that a good woman defers to authority all your life, it’s pretty hard to avoid the negative impact of sad heaven teachings.
I think we still believe things we are taught even when we think we don’t.
Judges 19-21. I didn’t know this story existed until taking a Bible as Literature class as a grad student. It makes no appearance in any of the manuals. Ever. For those curious, it makes Sodom and Gomorrah look like a day at Disneyland (what I always told my mythology students).
josh h, I grew up with my parents teaching me the literalness of Adam-Ondi-Ahman. My wife’s cousin was seriously contemplating moving to Missouri because she thought the last days were coming. In my life in the church, I’ve met quite a few others that literally believe that stuff. I used to read Meridian Magazine, a fairly popular magazine among believers. They regularly featured John Pratt, a self-described astronomer (seemed more like an astrologist to me) who promoted all kinds of crazy literalist belief in the OT miracles and all the stuff that Joseph Smith said.
Attended a concert by an LDS-adjacent choir/orchestra group last night in downtown SLC, and they seem to be “all in” on Joseph Smith and the BOM. It was a “God Bless America” event but they saved all the Mormon stuff for the last few numbers.
A month ago at Conference our Dear Leader reminded us that on 04/03/1836 which was a Sunday in Kirtland, Ohio, “Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery experienced a series of remarkable visitations,” including Jesus, Moses, Elias, and Elijah.
Keeping my screen name here which should indicate that I don’t want my bishop (who is also employed by the church) to know that (most of) you are my people.
ps did anyone catch Dua Lipa on Saturday Night Live?
I have a grandson on a mission in Missouri and yes, I can attest that many members of the family believe that he was called there to help us navigate our way back when the Savior comes. I also thought that idea was long gone, but once again, its reared its ugly, silly head.
All of section 89 in the D&C. Well, most of it we don’t believe. 1) That it was given “not by commandment or constraint”. 2) That we should only eat meat sparingly. 3) We should only drink wine as part of the sacrament.
And if I gather from our most recent general conferences, The Savior’s command to love one another and visit and care for the sick, imprisoned, poor, and hungry – without naming exceptions – is more of a guideline.. kind of like parlay.
In 2009, the church added a fourth mission of “To care for the poor and the needy” to the church’s threefold mission of the church. Making that one if it’s four primary purposes.
But, ya, we don’t really believe that anymore. Elder Bednar clarified in a speech to the National Press Club in 2002, “Please remember, however, that we are not primarily a humanitarian organization.”
Maybe when we get enough money saved up, we’ll go back to believing one of our primary missions is to care for the poor and the needy?
*2022
I guess my previous attempt got stuck in spam filter since I copy pasted from LDS org, so I will try again.
I feel like we don’t believe in D&C 111 anymore.
When was the last time you heard talk of the church reaping the gold and silver from Salem, MA in due time? (Or maybe that is actually where our $100B came from but we just don’t want Salem to know!)
I also get the feeling we don’t really believe in Joseph’s interpretation of the facsimiles in the BoA anymore. I haven’t heard them talked about in a gospel doctrine class in forever.
I feel like most of the Q15 probably wish they hadn’t done a gospel topics essay on the BoA now and kind of wish they could remove the facsimiles images from the PoGP if it wouldn’t be so glaring an edit.
JB, that Mosiah scriptures brings back fond memories of my mission. One morning in Hualpen (barrio of Concepcion Chile) I was reading those verses in Mosiah. When we left for work that morning, the beggar outside our apartment building held up his hand. How could I do anything but give him money. I remember I gave him a lot of money, so much so that my companion thought I had gone mad. The man looked astonished, and just walked away.
Anna, I love the reincarnation angle. I had never caught that before. I was already going to blog about that next week, and will now add those references, with a call out to you!
A3writer, Judges 19-21 is so bad! Not just sending his concubine out to be raped, but then cutting her up into 12 pieces because he was mad that she was raped? It is not clear to me if she was already dead from being raped, or the husband killed her.
Here is some info on reincarnation or multiple mortalities.https://salemthoughts.com/Topics/MultipleMortalities.shtml
About King Benjamin’s speech on being generous, please consider that in Mosiah 4:28, Benjamin declares that if you borrow from a neighbor you should return the thing you borrowed. This standard of borrowing requires the community to have a sense of private ownership.
I read Benjamin as recognizing there are limits and conditions on helping others. His point of emphasis is that we shouldn’t excuse ourselves from helping others with prideful self-justification.
Mosiah 4 in totality is about how to have a Zion community. Benjamin wants the people to be generous and honest with each other, to strip themselves of pride, to first and foremost care for their children, and to do all things with wisdom and order and humility before God
cachemagic,
Since this thread is about what we don’t believe–let me just say that I’m not convinced of multiple mortal probations. I do believe, however, that there will be further endowments of knowledge and power in the afterlife that will carry us far beyond what we receive here in mortality.
John 13:34-35
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye alove one another; as I have loved you, that ye also blove one another.
By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have alove one to another.
This does not fall in the category of obviously that was in the past “crazy” teachings.
But is the commandment, to love one another in the present? How often are we taught this? Is it part of the temple interview?
Non-leadership Mormons and even some decisionmakers may rarely use the words “we love you”, but is it backed up with action?
I turned 18 in 1980 and for my birthday present my parents were giving me a typewriter. I had the choice to make if it would be an electric or manual model. While I didn’t particularly enjoy church, apparently I was listening because I was very concerned about having to walk to Missouri in the near future. By my logic, if things were so bad that we were walking there, then it stood to reason that chaos would be reigning and there would be no electricity either. If I chose the electric model, it might well be rendered useless. I guess I also used enough logic to deduce that either way I wouldn’t be lugging that heavy typewriter on foot halfway across the country, so I might as well enjoy the convenience of an electric model while I could. I used the same logic, but reverse to purchase a hand wheat grinder. By my logic, if things were so bad that I actually had to eat that wheat, then I might not have electricity (or be able to afford it) to grind it and I would need to grind it. I’m glad the threat of everyone having to move to Missouri has passed – that was ridiculous.
A Disciple: yes, King Benjamin does indeed want everyone to be generous and care for their children and form a Zion society, AND he also teaches (and that quite explicitly) that we must give money to the beggar without judgment or precondition. It’s that final clause that keeps getting skipped over so consistently and flagrantly by leaders and lay-members alike, to the point that it might as well be de-canonized by now.
All my life in the Church, whether in Sunday School, Seminary, Institute, or what have you, I’ve heard every excuse in the book for why we shouldn’t just give money to panhandlers (e.g. they’ll just blow it all on drugs and alcohol, they’re all just lazy freeloaders, they’re mostly just scam-artists anyways, that “handouts” just enable laziness, that we just need to teach them “self-reliance,” that the “world” takes men out of the ghetto but the gospel takes the ghetto out of men, that it’s better to donate to a shelter or an NGO or the Church Humanitarian Aid fund directly, etc., etc.)–and who knows! Maybe all these reasons are right! But that is explicitly not what King Benjamin taught, and absolutely nowhere else in the Book of Mormon is any other doctrine taught.
On the contrary: the text fairly beats us over the head with the importance of helping the poor without judgment or precondition (e.g. Jacob 2:18-19, Mosiah 18:27-28, Alma 4:11-13, Alma 5:53-56, Helaman 4:12, Helaman 6:39-40, 4 Nephi 1:3, Mormon 8:37-38, etc., etc.), to a downright tedious degree. I’m a college English professor, I know when a text is belaboring its thesis. The only character in the Book to preach that profit and gain are inherent virtues is Korihor, and he’s explicitly called Anti-Christ. The sin of the Nephites was not just pride, but specifically a pride that led them to be stingy with the poor. We have to strenuously ignore large swaths of the Book of Mormon to justify our stinginess.
If we collectively as a Church truly believed that the Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion written especially for our day, then we would all be like Bishop Bill on his Chilean mission, constantly shocking people with our effusive generosity towards the poor. I dare say we would, at a bare minimum, have a better reputation if we did, and for the right reasons. But instead, we are primarily known nowadays for how much of our money we don’t give away.
I noticed back during the Kirtland Temple purchase that a number of LDS members insinuated the Community of Christ didn’t deserve to own the property, because they didn’t really believe in the Book of Mormon anymore; but it is not at all clear to me how many so-called “TBMs” really believe in it, either.
JB, you write: “we must give money to the beggar without judgment or precondition”
How much do we give and how often?What if we live where there are not beggars? Should we consciously make the effort to find beggars so we can give? How much effort do we make?
Benjamin explicitly teaches all things should be done in wisdom and order. He also teaches that if we wish to give in our hearts but don’t feel we can give that is sufficient. Is that not quite the cover?
Discernment and judgment are necessary in all that we do. The question is what discernment is prudent? What judgment is righteous?
Also, is the standard to give what the begger asks? Or is it to offer what the beggar needs. If we are using God as our reference the answer is to give what is needed – God is not keen on giving what is wanted or demanded. God provides what is needed and knowing what is needed requires the exercise of judgment. And offering what is needed may be rejected. Then what? Who is then at fault?
A Disciple, most of the answers to most of your questions are already in Mosiah.
Forgive my short response. I was at dinner, A Discple, but it irks me quite a bit fact that you are, in fact, misquoting what King Benjamin said, which is quite telling. You write that he says “if we wish to give in our hearts but don’t feel we can give that is sufficient.”
He says nothing about how we ‘feel’ about what we have. He writes, “I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I give not because I have not, but if I had I would give.” Having is the variable.
JB is right, and you’re proving it. We instert all sorts of stipulations that aren’t there.
A Disciple,
I wrote an entire post on Mosiah and the scripture is very clear as to the boundaries are, as in: whose job it is to do what.
The person in need of help, or the begger is the person who decides what it is they need. The giver has no role in deciding what is needed. That’s all for the person in need to define and to do the work of asking for what they need.
The person who is asked for help has only one decision. They decide if they have what the begger is asking for. Now it says very clearly in verse 14 that we aren’t to let our children go hungry, so that could factor into whether we have what they are asking for.
Read verses 17 and 18. It says very clearly that the giver isn’t allowed to judge whether it’s the begger’s own fault that he doesn’t have what he needs. In fact it says that anyone who judges the begger and says he deserves his punishment because of his past actions, “hath great cause to repent, and except he repent of what he hath done, he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.”
In verse 16 it says very clearly “ye will not suffer that the begger put his petition to you in vain”.
Joseph took this counsel very seriously. When he died the church was deeply in debt because of the care he took of the poor. He would take families in and have them sleep on his floor. They built the Nauvoo house with the express purpose of housing the poor better than they were.
If only the church would follow this council. My heart longs for a church that truly believes and follows the Book of Mormon in it’s care of the poor. I would much prefer we be in debt from trying to care for others instead of saving up huge amounts of money and only spending it on beautiful buildings that exclude the poor from entrance.
On the giving to beggars debate. I don’t and will never give money to beggars, although I make an exception for street performers. I’ll give food, clothing, blankets, and other necessities. I prefer to donate time and material goods to homeless shelters. I feel that giving directly to beggars is simply less effective in treating the root of the problem.
When I was in YW and went to Girls’ Camp we were required to learn and pass off all sorts of skills such as pitching a variety of tents, ways to cook outdoors, lashing showers and latrines, building fires without matches, using a compass and map to plot your way to any destination, first aid and more. As I grew up in a family that spent a lot of time camping and backpacking into the High Uintahs Wilderness area of Utah I already knew most of these skills courtesy of my dad, Mr Outdoors himself. I remember at the beginning of my first year at camp one of the girls in my YW class asked the camp director why we were learning this skills. That was when I first learned that we would need these skills when we were required to walk back to Missouri when the Second Coming happened.
At our camp we traditionally told scary stories at night to entertain and scare ourselves. However, our camp director, who became the YW president right after we returned home from camp, went into excruciating detail about the horrors we would encounter on our way back to Adam-Ondi-Ahman. What she told us was way scarier than even the most terrifying scary story anyone told. From first year Beehives to the 2nd year Laurels we were scared out of our minds and most of us had terrible nightmares throughout our time at camp.
The scary stories continued once we got back home when we went to YW on weekday evenings. Two years later I missed camp because I tore all of the ligaments in my right foot, but my sister went for her first time. She returned just as freaked out as I had been during my first 2 years. Just like me she had terrible dreams about having to pull a handcart to Missouri while dealing with all sorts of apocalyptic mayhem along the way. My parents realized after her return that it wasn’t just me that dreaded going to camp. (I gather that our YW president went into even more horrible detail and asked the girls if they thought that they were worthy of suffering for the Lord that particular year.) Our parents were completely unphased by our description of the stories we’d been told. Even though they had never told us or our brothers about “The Big Trek Back” they totally believed it wholeheartedly.
When I was 23 I was called to be a camp counselor at the same girls’ camp. There was zero talk about Missouri, and the skills that the girls learned were were touted as important skills to know in case of an emergency or a natural situation. I envied those girls so much! I rejoice that those horrific stories and the preaching of the need for us to walk back to Missouri vanished between my last year at camp and the summer I went to camp as a counselor.
Later on in the ensuing years my sis and I realized that we were being manipulated by our leaders to behave the way the church leaders wanted us to behave and to stay on their version of the strait/straight and narrow path. What a terrible way to try to keep us kids and adults from sinning! A lecture on the damned experiencing the tortures of going to hell and being burnt to a crisp was kiddies’ stuff in comparison!
Adam fell that men might be, and men are that they might have joy. Joy seems to be an essential purpose for life. Haven’t heard much about joy from church leadership recently. Do we still believe “man is that she might have joy.”
in Australia we have women marching in the street because a woman is killed by domestic partner every 4 days. If we extrapolate number of women killed by intimate partners in Utah 16 to Australia’s population 26m, it would be 121 or one in 3 days, 25% more. The elements blamed for this crime are unequal power between men and women, alcohol, lack of respect for women by men, and being pregnant, among others. Is the church advocating for the condition /grooming men to become abusers of women?
Brad, that may all be well and good, and I’m sure you have very good reasons for saying that, but that still means you have to believe parts of the Book of Mormon are not true.
I guess we’re all nuanced members, and the only really question is what parts we each choose to reject.
“Here is some info on reincarnation or multiple mortalities.https://salemthoughts.com/Topics/MultipleMortalities.shtml“
“Since this thread is about what we don’t believe–let me just say that I’m not convinced of multiple mortal probations. I do believe, however, that there will be further endowments of knowledge and power in the afterlife that will carry us far beyond what we receive here in mortality.” – Jack
These 2 direct quotes are part of the conversation about Mormons and Reincarnation.
Similarities: There is a “something” for spirits to go into to continue to develop after this mortal existance.
Difference: Reincarnation is in part defining that “something” is a repeat of this “level” (for the gamers) aka this “existance” with different parameters.
Non-Reincarnation is in part defining that “something” as continuing to level in a different environment, with different skills/tools (mostly a non-mortal state of spiritdom or resurrected individual).
I’d like to think that the “heavenly organization of logistics” has the capacity to provide for each spirit what type of leveling environment that spirit needs the most, or can experience the most growth in. Some spirits may need reincarnation to process stuff and grow. Other spirits may need to move on in a non-reincarnated fashion (maybe they are the restless types that need a lot of variation and distraction).
If giving is unconditional and on the demand of the beggar, why does Benjamin conclude with the advice in verses 27 & 28? What is the application of wisdom & order? What is the admonition to return the thing you have borrowed?
How many of you have spare rooms in your homes? How many of you are inviting homeless to live in those rooms? Is it not because you are exercising wisdom? Is it not because you are judging what you actually have strength to support?
How many of you who preach and defend unlimited generosity practice it?
Why did Jesus reject the complaint that expensive oil used to wash his feet might have been used to help the poor?
Benjamin also taught that we all are beggars. How does that change the calculation of who deserves help and what offering to others is needed?
A few months ago Elder Kevin Hamilton spoke at out Stake Conference. I think he was just a former SP at the time of his story (and I may mess up some details), but he spoke of a Homeless man who walked into Church one day and joined the meeting. In a matter of days, this man was staying in one of Elder Hamilton’s spare rooms. They only had one teenaged son left at home, so I imagine things could have been quite different. Elder Hamilton would often walk into his room to the smell of smoke.
I never got the impression he shared the story to say “Look at me!” He wasn’t even trying to invoke King Benjamin’s counsel and I think he felt we all took that for granted. His point was never to give up on anyone. It took about three years, but this guy eventually made it to the Temple and on his own feet. I honestly don’t know if I would do the same as Elder Hamilton.
You can count me as one who still believes Missouri/Adam-Ondi-Ahman. I do not, however, think we’ll be going back in cover wagons. I imagine there will be a small group of Saints who go back by car. The meeting will probably be low key. It will probably be broadcast by satellite and many of us will likely show our recommend at local stake centers to view it. It might coincide with a more non-descript temple dedication (as opposed to THE temple), and I think the media and a large portion of the bloggernacle might pass it off as a theatrical event. The general public would probably just brush it off.
A Disciple,
I don’t think anyone here is bragging about what we actually do in caring for the begger. What we do is likely different than what we think the scriptures are telling us to do, believe it or not. I at least, have my own regrets in how I have responded to beggers. Still, I try to be honest with myself. I don’t change the meaning of the scriptures in my mind to make it mean what I want it to mean. I acknowledge when there are conflicts I observe in the scriptures, and in how we are taught and in how we live.
I also want to be clear, again, that my comments in no way say the begger unconditionally decides what he should be given. He decides what he asks for. The person giving decides what they personally believe they have available to give to the begger, that he has asked for.
What this means to me: the elderly woman I minister to asks me for a ride at the last minute (she actually desperately needs the ride…or not. None of my business to judge or decide).
My business is: I look at my schedule and what cars I have available and I say, I can’t help you today. I could do it in a couple days. To me this is a latter day example of Mosiah 4 in my own life.
A Disciple, who many of us never get mad? How many of us pray always? How many of us . . . . Basically, how many us . . . never make a mistake. See where this is going? You seem focused on money. However, that does seem very typcial of conservatives: don’t throw a stink until money comes into play. Just sayin’.