Conference tecrus::mormonism

    
    Well, I believe, (and this is speculation) that we won't need any
    money during Jesus Christ's reign.
    If we look at the Order of Enoch, or the United Order, we consecrate
    our talents, energies, and possessions to the church and in return we
    receive a stewardship over these things. (odd, I was reading about this
    last night). If you believe this more perfect order will be brought
    back during the millennium, then the answer is yes. I don't believe that
    this type of arrangement will work as long as the adversary is loose
    and about (in today's world). If we look at the example of the Nephites
    after the visit by the Messiah, we see that they lived their lives for
    a period of time in such a way that they would have seemed to live the
    order. In this order, I believe, money wasn't necessary. Ultimately,
    greed and pride got the best of them.
    
    In looking at today's world, if we eliminated money, I'm sure man would
    come up with a substitute that would serve the same purpose. BTW, the 
    Saints were given the lesser Law of Tithing that, was given because of
    our inability to live the greater law. If the saints had problems then,
    it's doubtful that this materialistic world today could live without money,
    or some substitute for it. Besides, if governments had no way to
    redistribute wealth, (through taxation), much of their functions would 
    cease. In a world without money, or some form of exchange, society *in
    it's present form* would collapse. Yuppies would be an endangered
    species :). We would have to find a new way to measure wealth. 
    
    Kevin (waiting for the millennium)  

    Hmmm.  Interesting topic.  My first reaction is that the destruction
    of trade is really what is being considered.  This is because money
    was created so that people could take advantage of the economy of
    trade.  But, if nobody feels inclined to trade for goods, then we
    won't need money.  If everybody is happy to give their best in return
    for the satisfaction of rendering service, then we won't need to
    trade for goods.
    
    In the Church, that type of environment already tends to exist.
    That is, members have a tendency to serve in whatever capacity is
    available.  I've learned that although there is a hierarchy of
    structure, it does not translate to anybody being 'better' than
    anybody else.  Instead, everyone tends to work for the common good
    and is not paid for such efforts.

    When Christ comes, I suppose that there will no longer be need for
    trade.  So, there won't be need for money.  Rather, we will be living
    by a higher law, along the lines of the United Order.
    
    Steve

    I recall reading some on the United Order. Was it not tried at some
    point? Did not Joseph have plans to set up a test city based on this?
    It seems he did,but,realized it would not work in that time period?
    
      If everyone worked for the common good would it pretty much
    illiminate many of our problems? There would still have to be laws,of
    coarse,but it would have to be a world wide structure. Its seems that
    with the communication technology of today and in the future,a world
    government is much closer to a reality. Perhaps Jesus will use the
    technology for his purposes? He would have to set up councils around
    the world to oversee the operations,wouldnt he? Interconnected by the
    computer networks that will probably be used? Without a monitary
    structure,it would have to function according to the Gospel and the law
    of consecration.
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

    I agree that this would probably work only if the destroyer was bound. 
    Now, that I think about it maybe not.  Look at mennonites or ammish
    people.  Do they live by a similar code to what is being discussed?
    
    About a substitute, one would come into existance if money did not. 
    Remember Johnny Lingo and his cows.  He got himself an 8 cow wife which
    in today's language would be something like a million dollar wife. 
    Please no flames on the show conveying a "chauvinistic pig" attitude. 
    ;^)  
    Some societies measure wealth by land or livestock if money does not exist
    or have any purpose.  If I was starving on an island somewhere, a cow
    would be worth more than all the money in the world.
    
    scott

    RE:.4
    
    How many Amish are out there now? I was thinking of the shakers,
    for one example myself. I wouldn't think that the communal society 
    concept would work on a large scale today, given the forces at work
    in society and the difficulty in achieving some sort of isolation or
    differentiation from the rest of society. Besides, how would we take
    of the laggards?
    
    Kevin
    

Some of the previous replies have referred to the Law of Consecration as
the United Order.  This isn't quite correct.  The United Order was an
attempt by the Utah pioneers to implement the Law of Consecration.  During
the Millennium social conditions will be quite different than they were
in Utah during the late 1800's.  In addition, the Utah pioneers were
"telestial" while the people living during the Millennium will be "terrestial"
since Satan will be bound.  I would guess that the implementations of the Law
of Consecration during the Millennium will be quite different than the attempts
made in early Utah.

Allen

I have a different opinion than some of those expressed in the replies so far.
I've had the idea from somewhere that during the Millennium everyone will
follow Christ, but they will not all be members of the Church.  If this
is true, then it is likely there will be variations in the social
systems on the earth, and I would expect that some kind of monetary trade
will occur.  

We have seen during our lifetimes a trend away from physical objects of
trade (goods/money) and an acceptance of non-tangible trade through
electronic transfers.  I think it is likely that technology will continue
this trend, and I expect that during the Millennium monetary systems will
occur but they will probably be quite different than the ones we know today.

Allen

    re .6 and .7
    
    Allen,
    
    Yes, you are correct in reference to the Utah period. However if we
    go back early in the church history we find in 1831, the Prophet
    announced the Law of Consecration and Stewardship. Members were 
    taught that all things belong to the Lord and were directed to
    deed all personal property over to the bishop of the church. The
    Bishop,  in turn would return a Stewardship to each individual member
    who then would turn any accrued surplus to the church. This was known
    as "The Lords Law", "The Order of Enoch", or "The United Order"
    In this, the members were prepared for the millennial reign of Christ.
    (From Arrington, Fox and May. Building the City of God, Community and
    Cooperation among the Mormons Pg 2-3 . Deseret Book, 1976, and Mormon 
    Polygamy, a History, pg 2-3, Richard S. Van Wagoner,, Signature Book, 1989) 
    
    The later attempts in Utah, I believe were, more out of economic
    necessity among the Saints, rather than an attempt to usher in the
    millennial reign of the Saviour, for the country did have periodic
    downturns in its economy,ie. depressions. One of these occured during
    the mid 1870's, I believe. Of course, a major one occurred about
    1837, which in part, was a contributing factor in the failure of
    the "Kirtland Safety Anti-Banking Society" bank.
    
    In the millennium, I suppose we could have the situation you
    described. However, given that Satan would be bound early on,
    I would think that all socio-economic systems would adapt to this new
    order. The question here is: Does the binding of Satan affect man's
    free agency" and if it does not, does the choice change from"right
    or wrong" to some combination of "rights". Personally, if feel
    that our concept of free agency may be modified.
    
    Kevin

    
    Is it just Satan that will be bound,or,his followers too? If all those
    who follow Satan are also bound,wouldnt there be a temptation for
    others to be lured into Satans traps? How much sin would be tolerable?
    How would it be decided?
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

    
    Hi Mike,
    
    Here is Bruce R. McConkie's statement from "Mormon Doctrine" 2nd Ed.
    'However Satan will be bound and for a thousand years he "shall not
    have power to tempt any man" Accordingly, "children shall grow up
    without sin unto salvation" (D&C 45:58).  McConkie also references
    1 Nephi 22:26, stating essentially stating that because of the right-
    eousness of his people, Satan has no power..., He (McConkie) states
    earlier at the beginning of the millennium that it will be brought
    about by power, and not by voluntary righteousness, that those that are
    not righteous will be destroyed (Malachi 3;4). 
    
    So the wicked will be removed, that the millennium may commence, and
    righteousness will prevail. 
    
    Kevin