Dubbs wrote:He is comparing an time period when the saints were in the law of consecration, to now. Are we in the law of consecration? No, we are not, so his comparison is of two differing set of commands. And he bads mouths the church for not following it's own scriptures, when he doesn't understand what he's reasding TO BEGIN WITH! WITH!

Dubbs, it has been clear for years that Jaye understand LDS scripture, policy, and doctrine as well as anybody here and better than you.

He's right. The church has changed many times, which has led to a mass of confusion among its hundreds of denominations.

Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
[b]

Come up with the name of the family in San Diego County that misused church funds to enrich themselves and their friends? I suspect you know them.

Who cares, doesn't prove anybodies point in this discussion.

Are you a member of the construction firm? hmmmm

Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs writes insensibly, "You want me to prove this? I would take me 30 seconds, that you have never heard this is another sign, get in bed cliffy, further, snuggle up, tighten the blankets around you."

Did you have a point here?

Yes, that you didn't have one.

Dubbs writes, " think it's irrevelant, it's not extravagent, it's value is because it's in a high rise condo in down town area, prime real estate. But it is not given to them, it's not extravagent, and is a moot point to begin with."

It could be a shack in the grass, Dubbs, it would still be compensation for their work. That point is not moot.

ThomasK wrote: You could call it that. BUT, it's darn poor payback for the effort put forth. They are never released from their calling. And they have only one retirement choice, death.

The compensation is not a "could" but "yep, that's what it is", podjo.

Whether they payback is worth it or not is irrelevant.

It is what it is = compensation.

Dubbs writes in very bad English: "I have never disprected the Bible, I have said the men who took out the plain and precious parts were disgusting, and the mistake in the current bible are disgusting, but Joseph corrected them, and it is now a holy book of scripture, I respect it now that it has been translated correctly. // Do you beleive the article of faith on the issue Kitkat?"

You have disrespected the Bible repeatedly, and all knows it.

You have never pointed what supposedly "plain and precious parts" were removed.

We can check Joseph's corrections against the masters of the centuries, and his "translation" falls way short of what the scriptures say.