Grampa Bill responds:
>I know of one SP who was a mechanic until his business went bust
>just before his call, He then sold house trailers for a while but was
>terminated because of too few sales. After a period of unemployment he
>want to work as a machinist for the county.
>I know of another w
Paul Osborne wrote:
I was referring to Stake President and up. They have money and prestige.
There are plenty of talented yet poor High Priests who never get the call because they don't have money. Money is a prerequisite to those callings.
===
Grampa Bill responds:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 07:09:09 -0400, "Elmer L. Fairbank"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> At 03:13 10/25/2002 +, St Stephen wrote:
>
> >Perhaps you should tell Elders Maxwell, Nelson, and Hilbig about Occam's
> >razor, so they can get their acts together.
>
> What's a razor?
Till, a razor is that
Mark
>Several of the Brethren have stated that since the Nephites were not
Levites they never >did have the Aaronic priesthood even when under the
law of Moses. Therefore, so >state these same Brethren, the Nephites
always only had the Melchizedek priesthood. >They further state (IIRC)
that they
-Mark-
> Moroni talks about teachers and priests. This is several
> hundred years after Christ, so the Nephites had the Melchizedek
> priesthood at that time and were not under the law of Moses.
True enough. I was referring to earlier, pre-Resurrection references to
teachers and priests. But you
-Tilly-
> What's a razor?
He's the guy whut grows the crops.
Stephen
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
//
- Stephen -
Though this is off the main thread, it's an interesting side thread. I
don't agree that "teacher" was a Melchizedek Priesthood office for the
Nephites; the Melchizedek Priesthood was not generally held among the
Jews, so I don't see why it would have been generally held among the
N
At 03:13 10/25/2002 +, St Stephen wrote:
Perhaps you should tell Elders Maxwell, Nelson, and Hilbig about Occam's
razor, so they can get their acts together.
What's a razor?
Till
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Pleas
Gary, all this side discussion about Alma 13 and such is interesting
enough, and I'm happy enough to continue it -- though I suspect that,
upon review of the relevant teachings and a careful rereading of Alma's
words, you will agree that Alma 13 is much more inclusive than you've
been thinking,
-Gary-
> You give some nice definitions, but can you show where these
> definitions come from?
Mostly from the scriptures themselves. I am pretty sure that the Bible
never explicitly specifies that Enos was Adam's grandson, but the
meaning is clear enough that I can say that anyway. Similarly, A
"There are in this greater priesthood five offices or callingselder,
seventy, high priest, patriarch, and apostleyet the priesthood is the
same; and the priesthood is greater than any of its offices. We are a
kingdom of brethren, a congregation of equals, all of whom are entitled
to receive all
>From what I've noticed here in my ward--
Prospective Elders: 98% Inactive*
Elders: Seems like 25-30% Inactive, at least here
High Priests: 5-10% Inactive, but it seems as if the
inactivity occurs mainly for health reasons, such as
an extended hospitalization
As Paul O. noted, Prospective El
>Till, who hopes he hasn't offended
Of course not. I'm the one around here that probably is the most
offensive. When I was a kid I use to through rocks at beehives and shoot
my bee bee gun at the neighbors windows. :-)
Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
When I lived in Seattle, when I was 14 I got my patriarchal blessing (this was in
the old Renton ward of the Seattle Stake -- there are now 2 or 3 stakes in the
region that old ward covered, which dates me!). The patriarch asked me if I
wouldn't please try to friendship his son, who was going inact
Paul (from a post in reply to mine regarding the HP money issue):
> That's really odd. But administrators make more money than
> everyone else under the administration so he has the most
> money. I'm right and you're wrong.
John:
> I think that Paul is being deliberately provocative in order
> t
At 21:46 10/23/2002 -0500, St Paul wrote:
I will admit that I used
to annoyed about it in the past.
Till detects that it is still unresolved
But it is the Lord's church and he can
do whatever he wants, so I have come to accept it.
You're on the right track, though
but I'm sure he had suff
At 21:43 10/23/2002 -0500, Gary wrote:
The Brethren had comfortable lives because they earned a comfortable
life.
Not so sure I agree, Gary. Reference Approaching Zion Chapters 4 and
5. Not so sure earned is the correct choice of terms here.
Till
//
Paul Osborne wrote:
>
> And, yes, John gave me some good pointers. I've seen how John operates
> too and have watched him type letters to the list. I've seen his
> computer, chair, book shelves, and table. I can visualize him right now
> in my mind.
>
Having trouble sleeping, are we?
--
Marc
"John W. Redelfs" wrote:
> At 11:41 PM, Tuesday, 10/22/02, Gary Smith wrote:
> >It is partially an issue of maturity/age: placing those who have not had
> >a line authority position requiring HP status, into the HP quorum/group,
> >in order to strengthen the individual and also to strengthen the
At 11:29 PM 10/23/02, Stephen Beecroft wrote:
I do agree with at least one thing you've said: High priests are far
more likely to be active than elders.
Physically?
;-)
--Ronn! :)
I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon.
I never dreamed that I would see the last.
>I have heard that half of all elders are inactive. But that fewer than
5
>percent of high priests are inactive. Can anyone here confirm or deny
>this?
Sounds about right. Keep in mind though that this also includes the
perspective elders who never got ordained.
Gee wizz. Now I feel like
-John-
> I have heard that half of all elders are inactive. But that
> fewer than 5 percent of high priests are inactive. Can anyone
> here confirm or deny this?
I can't confirm or deny Church-wide, of course, but around here that's
not the case. 50% is approximately right for the elders, proba
>I think that Paul is being deliberately provocative in order to stir up
a
>discussion. I coached him while he was here.
>
>It works pretty good, doesn't it Paul?
Yep. Your s right John. I like to be provocative and stir things up.
It's fun, but I would feel bad if I hurt someones feeling
At 09:43 PM, Wednesday, 10/23/02, Gary Smith wrote:
There is nothing prestigious to these callings. There is some
recognition, but in all reality, the pay isn't that great. Most would
prefer to make it to heaven without the experience of being an apostle or
stake president, but the humble ones acc
At 08:48 PM, Wednesday, 10/23/02, Gary Smith wrote:
I would say that most apostles will have money. There are exceptions,
though fewer and fewer as the Church grows. Even today, many of our
apostles are not wealthy, but are comfortable.
In my family "comfortable" is a euphemism for wealthy. --J
I agree with everything you are saying Gary but I'm not thinking that all
the GA's were born with silver spoons. I know they worked hard and got
educated and have fine jobs that pay quite well. That is the nature of
the man who gets the call. I am merely pointing out how the Lord does
business and
At 12:03 PM, Wednesday, 10/23/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will we ever see a janitor, a manual laborer, a machinist, a farmer, a
rancher, as an apostle? To test this out - what are the current or former
occupations of the apostles? Its interesting that a carpenter ended up
saving mankind.
---
>What is your definition of "money"? Is it $40,000? $50,000? $100,000?
>$1,000,000?
My definition of money is when you have it in the bank and you don't owe
anyone anything except perhaps the mortgage.
>Most school administrators I know make about $50K. So if that is your
>definition of "m
At 08:47 AM, Wednesday, 10/23/02, Paul Osborne wrote:
I was referring to Stake President and up. They have money and prestige.
There are plenty of talented yet poor High Priests who never get the call
because they don't have money. Money is a prerequisite to those callings.
I hope that it doesn't
Gary Smith wrote:
> You make it sound like these jobs were handed to them on a silver
> platter. Not so. They all started at the bottom, with no silver spoon in
> the mouth. Any money the GAs have, they earned it. Any education they
> received was from hard work.
>
> Do you think any of them had
At 11:41 PM, Tuesday, 10/22/02, Gary Smith wrote:
It is partially an issue of maturity/age: placing those who have not had
a line authority position requiring HP status, into the HP quorum/group,
in order to strengthen the individual and also to strengthen the quorum.
Yes but that is not what th
Paul Osborne:
... to become a GA? The unwritten rule is that he has to
have money and resources. He almost always has a
prestigious job and a fine education. That is what the
Lord is looking for. If you don't have those benefits you
can't be called to be a GA, let alone a SP.
___
Val wrote:
>I must wholly disagree here. Our former stake president is only
>high school educated and a construction worker. He was my Bishop when I
>was a little girl, and back then he was managing a health spa. In fact,
>we had no font in the building, so I was baptized in the pool at the
spa.
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 18:09:51 -0500 Paul Osborne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>
> Did I say that a man had to be wealthy to become a GA? The unwritten
> rule
> is that he has to have money and resources. He almost always has a
> prestigious job and a fine education. That is what the Lord is
> loo
>Will we ever see a janitor, a manual laborer, a machinist, a farmer, a
rancher, as an >apostle?
A janitor, a manual laborer, and a machinist are not qualified to become
apostles but a rich rancher and a rich farmer could be considered.
Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
>Here are some of the former occupations of all the current apostles.
Neither President >Hinckley nor President Packer could have become
wealthy from their employment, so >Paul's theory fails in those cases
(granted, they may have made money from their >books, investments,
consulting fees, etc.).
Actually in the 3rd world a larger than proportional share of line authority
callings go to Church/CES employees. And, as I loved to tease Grant Johnson (I
think that's his name -- the Book of Mormon Answerman who infuriated many LDS by
saying that only those soldiers who fought for the Allies in
re...
Heidi the fair
> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 10/23/2002 2:04:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [ZION] High Priests have money
>
> Will we ever see a janitor, a manual laborer, a machinist, a farmer, a
rancher, as an apostle?
&g
Mark Gregson wrote:
>
> > To test this out - what are the current or former occupations of the apostles?
>
> Here are some of the former occupations of all the current apostles. Neither
>President Hinckley nor President Packer could have become wealthy from their
>employment, so Paul's theory
> To test this out - what are the current or former occupations of the apostles?
Here are some of the former occupations of all the current apostles. Neither
President Hinckley nor President Packer could have become wealthy from their
employment, so Paul's theory fails in those cases (gran
Paul Osborne:
>I can assure you that money is not a requirement in order to
>be called as a stake president.
I followed it for years in the Church News and have clearly seen
that the money guys get the callings. I can't deny those facts.
... It's one of those unwritten rules. ;-)
___
FWIW, this is also my reading of references to "high priests" in *most*
scriptures (I won't make a univeral claim because of course the D&C, especially
in 84 but elsewhere, too, makes a distinction between different offices of the
MP). IOW, it's a reference to the Melchizedek Priesthood in general.
Will we ever see a janitor, a manual laborer, a machinist, a farmer, a rancher, as an
apostle?
To test this out - what are the current or former occupations of the apostles?
Its interesting that a carpenter ended up saving mankind.
Vic
--- Paul Osborne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Don't con
>My former stake president was a public school teacher and later an
>administrator and my current stake president is in a similar income
>bracket. Both of them are most likely below the 50th percentile with
>regard to income within the stake boundaries.
>
>How can you justify statements like that,
>I can assure you that money is not a requirement in order to
>be called as a stake president.
I followed it for years in the Church News and have clearly seen that the
money guys get the callings. I can't deny those facts. The guys who get
called in third world countries are the merchants and t
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Osborne [mailto:osborne1962@;juno.com]
>
> Right. And your "ALSO" points out that the money is required
> in order to get those high callings of Stake President and
> up. Thank you for making my point, Gary.
My former stake president was a public school
-Paul-
> The Lord will not call a poor man to be an apostle. Poor people
> are just not good enough for the job. You have to have money.
If I remember correctly, Elder Packer spent his professional life in the
CES, a job practically guaranteed to keep you dressed in rags.
Stephen
//
Paul Osborne (replying to someone else):
Right. And your "ALSO" points out that the money is required
in order to get those high callings of Stake President and up.
___
I can assure you that money is not a requirement in order to
be called as a stake president.
I can further assu
Phew! Now at least I don't have to worry about dealing with THAT calling!
Jon
> The Lord will not call a poor man to be an apostle. Poor people are just
> not good enough for the job. You have to have money.
/
/// ZION
>Don't condemn the brethren simply because it seems the Lord (or the
>people) picks a lot of wealthy people. He does it because they ALSO have
>shown other great gifts of service, wisdom, and faithfulness.
Right. And your "ALSO" points out that the money is required in order to
get those high ca
I was referring to Stake President and up. They have money and prestige.
There are plenty of talented yet poor High Priests who never get the call
because they don't have money. Money is a prerequisite to those callings.
I hope that it doesn't sound like I am faulting the Lord. I'm simply
pointing
-Gary-
> We learn in D&C 107 that an apostle is a high priest
And an elder is a deacon. May we therefore say that in order to bless by
the laying on of hands, one must be a deacon? Technically it's true, but
it is certainly misleading.
In many places in scripture, "high priest" is used to mean
At 07:40 PM 10/22/2002 +, Stephen wrote:
-Gary-
> The only person among Elders with keys is the Elders Quorum president.
In other words, the only elder with keys is the presiding elder. Well,
of course. And the only high priest with keys is the presiding high
priest.
> Yet, his keys are limi
Gary said:
> There isn't anymore salvation promised to a high priest as to
> an elder (as the MP is all that is required in this life),
Yep.
>but
> eventually (presumably if not now, in the next life) one will
> have to be a high priest to preside over a presidency in heaven.
I don't think so G
I think I see your point, even past the tongue in your cheek, and hadn't thought
about that. The Lord needs a pool to draw from, and the HP are that pool, so
whether any given HP is or is not eventually called to what I keep calling a
posiiton of line authority (to use a secular term) is irrelevant
-Gary-
> The only person among Elders with keys is the Elders Quorum president.
In other words, the only elder with keys is the presiding elder. Well,
of course. And the only high priest with keys is the presiding high
priest.
> Yet, his keys are limited.
As are the bishop's or stake president
We had a riveting High Council speaker for quite a while (I know, I know, it's an
oxymoron, and that's the point -- that's why he was so outstanding). A refugee
from Pinochet's Chile, he was a widower and doggone it all, went and married a
divorcée in our ward, stealing her into one of the big city
At 12:08 10/22/2002 -0600, M Marc wrote:
My spouse is a Vulcan, and she's giving me the death grip.
Till was Vulcanized once. To keep his brains from leaking
out. Unfortunately, it was too little, too late
Till who's too "tired" to go "round and round" on this, so just "wheel" me
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 18:54:03 -0600 "Marc A. Schindler"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Okay, this is all very interesting and very useful (and I mean that
> sincerely),
> so let me ask another question: what about those of us who are
> unlikely, for one
> reason or another (assuming, of course, th
And you thought when we leaned over in Sacrament meeting and our spouses put
their arms on the back of our necks it was meant as a gesture of affection, too,
probably. Ah, the naïveté :-)
"Elmer L. Fairbank" wrote:
> At 07:59 10/21/2002 -0500, Gary wrote:
>
> >And yes, we have a secret handsh
At 08:48 10/22/2002 -0400, Patient noJ wrote:
Till - every time we went over this handshake I tried to wake you up, but to
no avail. I would have had your home teacher go over it with you, but we
can only teach it in the HP group meeting.
They sure were cool dreams, too. Something to do with
Till - every time we went over this handshake I tried to wake you up, but to
no avail. I would have had your home teacher go over it with you, but we
can only teach it in the HP group meeting.
Noj
Elmer L. Fairbank wrote:
> At 07:59 10/21/2002 -0500, Gary wrote:
>
> >And yes, we have a secret ha
Till writes:
What??? I thought that was just the special
grip that we use to keep each other from falling
out of chairs when we fell asleep.
___
Oh, Till. It serves a far more important purpose than that.
As you shake right hands, place two fingers of the
left hand just ins
At 07:59 10/21/2002 -0500, Gary wrote:
And yes, we have a secret handshake that you elders know nothing
about.
What??? I thought that was just the special grip that we use to keep
each other from falling out of chairs when we fell asleep.
Till
/
Okay, this is all very interesting and very useful (and I mean that sincerely),
so let me ask another question: what about those of us who are unlikely, for one
reason or another (assuming, of course, that we're reasonably righteous,
temple-recommend-holding active members) are highly unlikely to h
65 matches
Mail list logo
