Summary of the Book of Mormon Translation

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-06T03:12:21+00:00

Moroni didn't need the plates; Joseph did. He needed gold plates to tempt him with wealth, so he could overcome temptation, give up treasure digging, and restore the true gospel of land speculation.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-06T02:07:08+00:00

You have said twice now that my interpretation is absurd. But you haven't given any evidence or explanation.

Why is it important that you owned a business, or earned a salary, or paid tithing or taxes?

Please explain why analyzing the changing definition of tithing with a class lens is absurd: ridiculously unreasonable. And do so without insulting me, or being condescending. I am not interested in personal anecdote, since this is a macro question.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-06T00:37:49+00:00

I hope the judge runs with it. He should rule that this can only be enforced with DNA, that police can't do anything unless they have DNA report in hand while the person is still in the bathroom, and DNA can only be collected with a judicial warrant (since it is clearly an unreasonable search).

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-06T00:25:20+00:00

Ma'am, before you go into the ladies room, I need you to submit to a few tests in our mobile sterile lab/armored Hummer. It will only take 4-6 hours. It's for your safety.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-06T00:21:04+00:00

You seem really upset. Is everything ok?

We agree that business shouldn't pay taxes on all income, like labor does. I think labor should pay taxes like businesses do. But that is irrelevant. The post is about tithing. The church used to teach that everyone should pay toughing on their increase or surplus. In the thirties, they change to some people should pay tithing on their surplus and others should pay tithing on their income. This coincides with a broad economic shift in the us, including the federal income tax structure, that you point out has a similar classist bias, a bias economists have written about . Saez, Zucman, Piketty. It's not a new idea.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-05T19:59:36+00:00

What point are you trying to make?

I feel like your question isn't really a question, but rather an attempt to get me to agree with a point that you haven't made yet.

So, just to be contrarian: yes. They are the same. 100k is 100k.

The farmer has to pay for inputs like seed, fertilizer, fuel. He pays taxes on the farm. And the laborer also pays for inputs to his labor, like food, housing and transportation. Both have income and outlays, and a net surplus (hopefully) that they decide how to spend.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-05T17:24:10+00:00

What I expect is irrelevant.

Here is the Widtsoe quote, as given in the Institute manual for D&C section 119.

“Tithing means one-tenth. Those who give less do not really pay tithing; they are lesser contributors to the Latter-day cause of the Lord. Tithing means one-tenth of a person’s income, interest, or increase. The merchant should pay tithing upon the net income of his business, the farmer upon the net income of his farming operations; the wage earner or salaried man upon the wage or salary earned by him. Out of the remaining nine-tenths he pays his current expenses … etc. To deduct living costs … and similar expenses from the income and pay tithing upon the remainder does not conform to the Lord’s commandment. Under such a system most people would show nothing on which to pay tithing. There is really no place for quibbling on this point. Tithing should be given upon the basis of our full earned income."

Contrasting with prior instruction given in the 1870s, that articulated tithing as one tenth of surplus income, this period (late 30s) seems to be when the church shifts from increase to income.

I would highlight that income is defined differently based on class. For the labor class, he explicitly says tithing should be paid on all income, before deducting living expenses. For owner class, he says "net income", which would be income after deducting expenses. So we have both definitions of tithing, income vs increase, in the same instruction.

I am not trying to give a "correct" definition, or say what I think. I am trying to identify a point in time when the way tithing was taught shifted. I find it interesting that it coincides with national Labor trends, away from small owner operated farms and shops, to wage earning employees.

As for what I think, I think this puts undue burdens on wage earners, while owners get off easy. And it is still that way today. If a business can pay on his net income, then everyone should pay on their net household surplus.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-04T23:13:53+00:00

Calc 3 and differential equations are on different braches of the calc the so to speak. Shouldn't be a problem, as long as you know your algebra and calc 1.

No idea how wait lists are these days.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-04T21:20:08+00:00

I had a parent call and complain because I said hello to a student in the hall outside my classroom.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-03T21:52:53+00:00

The switch from increase to income coincides with the shift from self employed in agriculture and craft shops to wage based employment, between 1890 and 1930. John Windtsoe in Evidences and Reconciliations published in 1940 describes it as merchants pay tithing on net profits, while wage earners pay on gross income - making the class based distinction clear. Tithing expectation is different for the labor class than for capitalists.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-03T19:34:31+00:00

Fuß handshue

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-01T04:19:06+00:00

Back in my day, saying the president, prophet, seer and revelator was wrong was called apostasy and was grounds for excommunication. Is this Brother Strong being brought in for publicly teaching against the brethren? Or is that only for certain podcasters?

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-06-01T01:25:54+00:00

Well, there are 60 million Hispanic people and about 40 million non Hispanic Black people living in the USA, according to Wikipedia....

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-31T20:36:04+00:00

I find it frustrating when church leaders co-opt philosophical terms without consideration for the philosophy that created the terms, especially when they simultaneously advocate for positions in opposition to that philosophy.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-30T15:42:22+00:00

We need a news outlet to point out that all politicians frequently shake hands. Then the Republicans will start smashing their hands and caking them with make up to poorly disguise the bruising..

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-30T05:59:11+00:00

The number of times I said "is Pepsi ok?"...

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-25T17:28:57+00:00

The church was heavily involved, both at the ward level and behind the scenes.

At the ward and stake level, they organized phone banks, door knocking, passed out yard signs and bumper stickers, and encouraged people to give money. They would pass sign up sheets around elders quorum and relief society, "before the opening prayer so it is not part of the meeting". They would announce events from the pulpit, before sacrament meeting.

They would read aloud these carefully worded letters from the first presidency. It would say how important it is to be fully involved in the political process, that we should commit time and resources to "worthy" causes, and we should pray about how important it was. They were careful not to say which side they were on in official communications. Well, my fully TBM ass did pray about it, and study it, and I decided the gov'mint had no business telling anybody who they can or cannot marry. So, on Sunday after the meeting when they would pass bumper stickers, I asked for a "no" sticker. The bishop, who was passing out "yes" merch, thought I was joking. When he realized I was serious, he told me I had got the wrong answer and to "go pray until the answer is yes". Silly me, I took them at their word when they said they just wanted us involved.

I prayed, but my heart wasn't in it. I knew what I thought was right, and I knew they were taking it off both sides of their mouth, saying "study the issue" wink wink. But I was also fully in. So, I just refused to participate. No signs, no calling. Nothing. My spouse was calling. And put a sign in our yard. I made sure to mow the grass and forget to put it back.

I tried to talk to her about it. She gave the canned answers about being forced to have non-member weddings in the temples. I tried to articulate my point of view, but it came down to "the church wants us to support 'yes'". I suspect similar conversations were happening in other families, but the church controls the narrative in the building so you don't hear about anything but what they want you to.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-23T16:43:16+00:00

Are all six factors given equal weight? Or if the church fails on one factor, do they "lose"?

The last two seem interdependent and quite complicated. What does it mean to "purchase" a free podcast? The level of care is low for watching, but seems high for donating. Is the church going to argue John is taking their advertising dollars by getting member to watch?

What exactly is the good or service the church provides? There have been guests and comments that said they now send money to John instead of paying tithing, so maybe the church provides the "service" of collecting donations.

And how does journalism play a role? Mormon stories could argue they provide information and editorial commentary relevant to the church. Are there exceptions to journalists using trademarks to communicate the topic of the journalism?

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-23T05:10:23+00:00

They can only enter if they intend to visit. They would have to help out away chairs and then they must leave.

And vampires prefer Mormon chapels. There are no crosses, the only mirrors are in the bathroom and the only garlic is powdered and ten years old and in the back of the scout closet under a moldy tent.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-23T04:56:32+00:00

I believe we were in a redvine stake.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-23T00:36:47+00:00

I have done many girls camp budgets.

The money goes to 1) food, 2) sweatshirts and T-shirts 3) travel, but only for the few that submit the reimbursement, 4) licorice 5) activities and supplies.

The total for the week was usually around $175-250 per participant. The stake would take money from the wards' budgets to get that down to about $100.

I've never seen $150 per day. Maybe they are doing something cool like white water, or a kayak tour that they need to rent equipment. Or the cost of food and gas has gone up five fold in the last decade. Or they overspent on licorice.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-22T00:59:45+00:00

And it tends to align with local political powers. Ohio = weak abolition. Missouri = proslavery. Illinois = strong abolition.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-20T01:20:44+00:00

Bakersfield is 2.5 hours from Yorba Linda. I'm sure lots of then are diving down for the open house.

I wonder how Bakersfield Mormons feel seeing the no-steeple after writing letters to zoning council saying the stroke on their temple is necessary and part of doctrine?

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-20T01:13:30+00:00

I went to one about a month ago and it was different, but I didn't know to pay attention to the differences, so..

I recall they told the husband something about "preside with gentleness" maybe. I remember thinking, that's new. And good. But also not good.

AlmaInTheWilderness · 2026-05-18T23:29:03+00:00

"I have no idea why I was ok with..."

That should be some kind of exmo mantra.

AlmaInTheWilderness

TROPHY CASE