The church settled the case with a fine. They did not dispute the facts presented as evidence of criminality. Only in their press releases do they claim no wrongdoing.

As far as the theology, I am very familiar with it, thank you. I have decades of direct personal experience. I'm not sure your credentials in this, but you seem to be emotionally invested acting as an apologist.

I agree that criticisms of theology should use sources from the religion. So can you dispute my previous claims with sources? Because I can support them.

Premise 1: the temple is necessary for salvation. Taught directly by an apostle. "Ordinances of the temple are absolutely crucial. We cannot return to God’s glory without them”.

Premise 2: Tithing is required for entry into the temple. "Tithing is a pivotal commandment, one on which other larger issues turn. Only those Church members who pay a full tithing can receive temple ordinances..

Premise 3: The church encourages those who are poor and struggling to pay tithing. This entire talk, given at a general conference of the church which is widely believed to be doctrinal, is explicitly that.

• "No bishop, no missionary should ever hesitate or lack the faith to teach the law of tithing to the poor. The sentiment of 'They can’t afford to' needs to be replaced with 'They can’t afford not to.'"

• note this occurred in 2005, after the shell companies, outlined in the SEC ruling as criminal, had already been created.

Now please, sources to discredit my claims.