tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7564854976164423806.post3054905012192609107..comments2022-11-07T06:18:18.673-07:00Comments on The Gray Sheep: Mormons, God & MammonKikuchiyohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15347769267966287319noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7564854976164423806.post-62805411182056679292007-07-31T19:35:00.000-06:002007-07-31T19:35:00.000-06:00Okay, so “intentional poverty” is probably oversta...Okay, so “intentional poverty” is probably overstating it (although if you follow some of Jesus’ teachings through to their logical conclusions, it’s not that big of a leap). I guess I’m just a bit weary of the Puritanized Christianity that enters the room anytime somebody starts quoting from "<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/God-Wants-You-Be-Rich/dp/0684825325" REL="nofollow">God Wants You to be Rich</A>."<BR/><BR/>In this vein, I think your "gentler approach" was the way to go. No need to rag on riches, but capitalist haters shouldn’t hog the spotlight either. It sounds like you did a great job. I just wish you were a teacher in my EQ.D. Largitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09625878427068481699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7564854976164423806.post-59351132124812683652007-07-31T16:04:00.000-06:002007-07-31T16:04:00.000-06:00It seems to me that the imperative is not "Be ye p...It seems to me that the imperative is not "Be ye poor!" but "Be ye generous!" I think we are to learn to attract as much wealth as easily as possible in this life that our dominion may without compulsory means flow unto use forever and ever (see D&C 121:46). In this life, the fullness of the earth is ours (59:15-21). We need to learn what to do with it (including acquiring it) in order to be trusted with much greater wealth in the next life as Christ teaches in <A HREF="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=luke+16%3A9-13&do=Search" REL="nofollow">Luke 16</A>, and in the parables of the talents and of the sheep and goats in Matthew 25.<BR/><BR/>This is how I understand the idea of gaining riches "to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted" in Jacob 2.<BR/><BR/>Our problem is that we hold on to it like the fool in <A HREF="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=luke+12%3A13-21&do=Search" REL="nofollow">Luke 12</A>. We saints too often use our family as an excuse to limit our generosity forgetting that Joseph taught that "A man filled with the love of God, is not content with blessing his family alone, but ranges through the whole world anxious to bless the whole human family." We can also rely too much on the arm of flesh and think we need to hoard the goods that come to us. We may also just be giving into our lusts in hanging on to all that the Lord puts in our hands.<BR/><BR/>I'm comfortable with idea of learning how to become more wealthy as I learn how to become more generous. I just hope the former doesn't out-pace the latter.<BR/><BR/>I like your suggestions for an EQ class, DL. I should have talked to you before I taught.Kikuchiyohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15347769267966287319noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7564854976164423806.post-23743531416077902982007-07-31T13:24:00.000-06:002007-07-31T13:24:00.000-06:00K - I commend you for taking on this assignment. I...K - I commend you for taking on this assignment. I know you have taught this lesson before several times (albeit in a secular/academic setting). However, this is a tough lesson for several reasons.<BR/><BR/>While <A HREF="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/matt/6/24#22" REL="nofollow">Matthew 6:24</A>, <A HREF="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/luke/16/13#10" REL="nofollow">Luke 16:13</A>, and <A HREF="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/3_ne/13/24#22" REL="nofollow">3 Nephi 13:24</A> are <I>very</I> clear about the diametrical relationship of God and mammon, I'm really not clear on the eternal message. On the one hand mammon = money, and Jesus is pretty clear where he stands on money (e.g. eye of the needle, widow's two mites). Plus, the Book of Mormon is full of stories where missionaries are turned away from evil rich people, only to find humble, poor people on hillsides looking for the truth. (Modern comparisons to Europe and South America only fuel this notion). One look at our modern, capitalistic, industrially-advanced community where even the poorest of your analytic, humanities-inclined colleagues lives better than many of Egypt's most powerful Pharaohs and it's impossible to not be cynical.<BR/><BR/>But what of God's great power and wealth? Omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence. Worlds without number, power without end. "In my Father’s house are many <I>mansions</I> (<A HREF="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/john/14/2" REL="nofollow">KJV</A>), <I>rooms</I> (<A HREF="http://www.ibs.org/niv/passagesearch.php?passage_request=John+14%3A2&niv=yes" REL="nofollow">NIV</A>), <I>dwelling-places</I> (<A HREF="http://bible.oremus.org/?passage=John+14%3A2" REL="nofollow">NRSV</A>)…" The goal of this life is to become like God, and yet we’re instructed to be intentionally poor? No comprende. Shouldn’t we replace the lead-crystal chandeliers that adorn our celestial rooms with kerosene lamps? Shouldn’t we closet our $800 business suits for Levis and free Bank of America t-shirts? What, exactly, does a gospel that preaches poverty tell us about a society trying to eradicate poverty, full of people that are trying to become like the richest being we can comprehend? It seems like one big misunderstood intersection of metaphor and literal commandment. And I don’t claim to have a clear understanding.<BR/><BR/>Your question about the appropriate venue to explore cold war philosophies in LDS thinking is very good. There’s no doubt that our focus on the nuclear family, gender roles, and emergency preparedness for unthinkable destruction was fostered and developed by Eisenhower-era public policies. However, that doesn’t make them wrong <I>ipso facto</I>. Encouraging people to think about these ideas, however, and the implications that arise given the circumstances sounds like the work of a good EQ teacher. Because the gospel is so (attractively) individualistic, I think we’re all turned off by lessons that try to convince us what is right and what is wrong. In my opinion, a good lesson hinges on "discovery." The successful lessons I have seen (meaning higher rates of participation and a sense when I get home that I didn’t waste my day) usually focus on a plurality of methodologies for gospel practice, or interesting correlations or historical facts. They allow me to discover something new about the world, but allow me to draw my own conclusions. Overly-confident teachers or observers are annoying, whether at church, in a class, or at a political rally. There are only a few people in this world whom I trust enough to <I>really</I> listen to their candid opinions; people who really have an influence on how I think at the end of the day. Not one of them resides in my EQ.D. Largitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09625878427068481699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7564854976164423806.post-47396636661813096692007-07-29T15:56:00.000-06:002007-07-29T15:56:00.000-06:00If you don't aggressively and directly show what t...If you don't aggressively and directly show what the scriptures say about our obligation to help the poor and the evils of amassing wealth, then you will only end up with a lesson that says "It's ok to be rich as long as you pay tithing and take the youth out on your boat once a year."<BR/><BR/>Not that I'm saying that your lesson was like that. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com