Talk:Shepherd's Rod

message: The main thing this article is in need of, I think, is some description of what the doctrinal difference that caused the schism actually was. Unfortunately, I don't know, which is one of the reasons I was reading this in the first place. Is there anyone with more knowledge that can work something about that in? El Juno 23:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: So, what is it?

message: Based upon my first hand knowlege of the DSDA beliefs and origins I felt it nessesary to correct some obvious and glaring statements that were incorrect.
I changed upshoot to offshoot as this is an article and not a wittnessing tool.
I also changed the paragraph that discussed the reasons for his disfellowshiping to reflect the realities that the author of this article intended to obscure.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.185.1.100 (talk) 19:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know nothing at all about this subject, hence why I'm here. But the opening paragraph is so painfully, awfully written, I'm basically begging someone to sort it out. It's all wrong grammatically and the fact that it doesn't make sense completely obscures the meaning. There's a typo ('mot', for 'not'?) for a start. And is 'profess' the right verb? I don't think it is. 'Additional truth' - additional to what? Ahhhhh, just horrible!! Also, I guess its been changed back since the above comment, but I don't think 'up-shoot' is a real word, and if it is then it's being misused. Surley it should be 'offshoot from'? Maybe I should have just gone ahead and changed this myself, but I'm not an experienced enough wiki-er to know if thats ok, and also I don't want to distort the meaning further considering I don't know what it's trying to say anyway. I'm dreading reading the rest of the article after that...79.71.242.180 (talk) 23:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Note: the purpose of the article is to inform of the beliefs of the original Davidian Seventh-day Adventists under V T Houteff.  Please do not alter their beliefs just because you do or do not believe in them yourself (re. your change of the word upshoot to offshoot.  Davidians actually teach they are upshoots.  They do not teach they are offshoots.  Your change was not factual to their beliefs.)  If you are going to comment regarding the beliefs of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, please keep the references FROM V T Houteff.  If you believe you have additional truth AFTER V T Houteff, please feel free to open a section on your specific type of movement and include information on how you differ from the main body of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists under V T Houteff.   tonadachi.  October 23, 2010.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonadachi (talk • contribs) 04:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisions 

message: This is a note to inform all interested watchers of this article that Wikisource has chosen the Branch Davidians and Waco Siege as their Collaboration of the Week.  
This means that we are spending this week collecting, copying and formatting Public Domain documents related to the church and its 1993 siege. This includes speeches by David Koresh, Federal documents in the aftermath of the siege, the charges against Lon Horiuchi and the surviving church members, and early church documents whose copyright have expired.
We would encourage you all to come help us, if you have any questions, feel free to leave a question on my talk page - either on Wikisource or Wikipedia!
I hope to see some of you there, helping us document the primary sources for future research and historical analysis!
Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead)  21:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: the purpose of the article is to inform of the beliefs of the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists.  Please do not alter their beliefs just because you do or do not believe in them yourself (re. your change of the word upshoot to offshoot.  Davidians actually teach they are upshoots.  They do not teach they are offshoots.  Your change showed bias and was not factual to their beliefs.  tonadachi.  October 23, 2010.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonadachi (talk • contribs) 04:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: WS:COTW

message: The section Doctrinal Overview is not a doctrinal overview, it is a statement like "we never intended branching off, it's those other guys that are evil"! I don't care, I wish to read a doctrinal overview! The section Key Fundamental Beliefs contains doctrines, but not exactly an overview. Maybe some points could be picked from there and used as seeds to write a Doctrinal Overview. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 17:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Doctrinal Overview" not found

message: October 26, 2010: 
This article should reflect the period of time and the beliefs of V T Houteff and the original Mt Carmel Center under his direction only.  As such, all quotations should be references from the original writings and/or pictures of the original workers/location/work.
  
Other articles with different titles can be created to reflect succession organizations and beliefs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonadachi (talk • contribs) 14:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remain true to the facts 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Davidian Seventh-day Adventist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130309004124/http://shepherdsroddavidian.org:80/symbolic%20Code/1sc_04.html to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/symbolic%20Code/1sc_04.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131224114636/http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Davidian Seventh-day Adventist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140116135303/http://docs.adventistarchives.org/docs/CM/CM2005__D.pdf to http://docs.adventistarchives.org/docs/CM/CM2005__D.pdf#view=fit
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Davidian Seventh-day Adventist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224114636/http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224114636/http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224114636/http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/leviticus.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Note: there is the comment "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (May 2017)" and 
"This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, potentially preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral" (May 2017)  What and how is this a concern? The article gives good references and speaks of knowledge of the issue of the Davidians. Give some proof or take these off. Additionally someone has messed with this article which was untouched for a couple years. They went in there and messed up some of the references. Many of the references now show "Error 404" when clicked. These were made, we believe by "Leggsoh" in the view history section. Lastly, this article is about Davidian SDA not Branch Davidians, a separate religious group.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Presenttruth777 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: the COI tag is very appropriate to anyone reading this talkpage. It will remain until enough effort has been expended by editors who are independant of the topic in checking, verifying and rewriting the page. (ie not PresentTruth777 who represents this group). Second, Branch Davidians are one of the offshoots within the family of groups that sprang from the Shepard's Rod. You can't on one side say the Davidians are a reform movement within Seventh-day Adventists and are very much like them, than say the. Branch Davidians are a separate religious group without a connections. Please explian why Branch Davidians are not classed as one of the "successor" groups with just as much claim to the Rod literature as the Missouri group or others?  Legacypac (talk) 15:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Tags

message: At User:Presenttruth777 who is the "we" you refer to on this page. Are you a group of people?  Legacypac (talk) 07:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The original authors of this article Presenttruth777 (talk) 04:49, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Who is that? Is there a group behind your account? Legacypac (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's worth noting that the top three contributors to this article , User:Presenttruth777, User:Tonadachi, and User:Srodinfo (cf. "The Shepherd's Rod") have edited little or nothing other then this article or the Branch Davidians article.  Also Tonadachi's last edit was 2013-06-18 and Presenttruth777's first edit was just 5 days earlier, on 2013-06-12, which perhaps indicates the turning over of the responsibility for "guarding" this article from one person to another within an organized group. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:49, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This page reads like promo for this small group. They are not Seventh-day Adventists they are harsh critics of SDAs and this page is far too heavily based on what the group says about itself vs what others say about them. I'm going to start fixing that. If the WP:SPAs get in the way of fixing that they can expect blocks at ANi. We should start by blocking PresentTruth777 for proporting to represemt an organization. The username is a clear reference to Seventh-day Adventists, and a term often used by the church's far right critics. Legacypac (talk) 19:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

text: Who is this "we" you refer to? User:Beyond My Ken and I are both experienced wikipedia editors across hundreds of topics. Your editing here was already brought to ANi where you could be blocked and/or otherwise sanctioned. If you continue to WP:OWN this page you will run into sanctions. I know enough about Shephard's Rod to have an intellegent conversation, and as you will see, I can evaluate sources against text for accuracy, applicability, reliability, and independence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legacypac (talk • contribs) 03:36, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Davidian Seventh-day Adventist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/symbolic%20Code/3sc_02.html
*Added  tag to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/symbolic%20Code/3sc_02.html
*Added  tag to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/5ans.html
*Added  tag to http://shepherdsroddavidian.org/miscellaneous/5ans.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116064558/http://shepherdsrod.org/history/the-story-of-the-shepherds-rod/4/ to http://shepherdsrod.org/history/the-story-of-the-shepherds-rod/4/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116064558/http://shepherdsrod.org/history/the-story-of-the-shepherds-rod/3/ to http://shepherdsrod.org/history/the-story-of-the-shepherds-rod/3/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116064558/http://shepherdsrod.org/history/the-story-of-the-shepherds-rod/4/ to http://shepherdsrod.org/history/the-story-of-the-shepherds-rod/4/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:35, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This source does not check out as supporting the paragraph it references, which is why I removed it and added cite needed. . Testimonies page 164 talks about Adventists and in the next sentence mentions "Israel of today" but does not say Adventists are the "Israel of today" specifically. More plausably she classes Adventists, along with all Christians, as part of "Israel of today" in the context of being like the ancient Israel in the ways mentioned in the rest of the chapter. But anyway, that is not the main point of that chapter and it is irelevent to the article paragraph. Nothing in the chapter mentions 144,000. Sorry, but if you want to say the Rod believes something, you need to provide a WP:RS not a reading into E.G. White's writing what is not there. If you want to claim EGA said something, a proper citation to her work that shows she said something is required. I'm taking out the whole paragraph. Don't put it back unless you provide the sources here on talk for review first. Legacypac (talk) 06:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Source does not support

message: Per WP:COMMONNAME why is this article named Davidian Seventh-day Adventists]]. Prior to encountering this page I'd only ever hear or read of the group being called Shepherd's Rod. Their own websites use the SR name. The page itself says in the lede the common name is Shepard's Rod, and the legal name was for a time Shephard's Rod according to this page. Please clarify. Legacypac (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That appears to be a knottier problem then I would have thought.  I'm still investigating, but my initial exploration of the various websites leads me to think that they were indeed called "The Shepherd's Rod" for some time -- at least colloquially -- and then at some point began to be referred to as "Davidian Seventh-day Adventists".  What the "official" name is seems to be hard to establish, as my impression (which could well be wrong) is that we're not looking at a single hierarchical organization, but a network of affiliated groups and organizations, among which (perhaps) none is acknowledged to clearly be the top of the chart, and therefore none of which can define what the name of the movement is.  (Please feel free to correct any of these tenuous findings -- I'm still looking into this.)Just in terms of Google hits, "The Shepherd's Rod" brings up 54,600 ghits, while "Davidian Seventh-day Adventist" gets only 7,460.  By that metric, it would seem that "The Shepherd's Rod" would be the proper name for the article.  There's also the fact that the article appears to have been written  primarily by DSDA adherents (who continue to try to WP:OWN it), and (as you point out) it says hat "The Shepherd's Rod" is the common name, so that, too, would point to a move being in order. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: my understanding is that The Shephard's Rod was the term used exclusively from the early 1930's founding until 1942/1943 when they had to incorporate and organize as a distinct church in order to get religious deferments and conscientious objector status during WWII. The Davidian name came out then. Immediately on the founders death in 1955 the group broke into warring factions with different names roughly as described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davidian_Seventh-day_Adventist#Rise_of_Florence_Houteff The Branch Davidians ended up with the Mount Carmel quarters and Florence ended up with the DSDA legal entity, dissolving it to strip out the assets. Some work needs to be done to spell out this history and better list the groups that rose from the split. Legacypac (talk) 21:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so you're way ahead of me on this.  It sounds like the article should be moved to "The Shepherd's Rod", with something in the lede saying that it was "formally organized as the Davidian Seventh-day Adventist Church. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:58, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and thanks for "conscientious objector".  I didn't quite understand what the source I cited below meant by "noncombatant status" -- I thought it had some religious or internecine significance, but the meaning is clear now. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Darn spelling - I understand the Shepherd's Rod followers took a similar position toward noncombatant status as Adventists - serve as a medic or chaplain but don't kill - see Desmond Doss/Hacksaw Ridge for a famous example and Operation Whitecoat for another. Legacypac (talk) 22:18, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Name

message: I reverted an edit by  which added the Davidians to the SDA History section.  Given that this sect has no official standing within the Seventh-Day Adventist church, I felt it wasn't helpful to the understanding of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.  Should the template be removed from this article?  Am I wrong?  There should obviously be linking for this offshoot/schism.  Thanks!  78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Davidians are just a minor offshoot, measured in the thousands against the millions of Adventists. Not really an Adventist subject. Legacypac (talk) 03:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with the removal - splinter groups are obviously important to the main topic.  Perhaps there should be a new division, which includes all splinter groups.  The argument that Davidians are not in SDA doesn;t make much sense to me: after the history section has a link for Millerites.  The purpose of the SDA sidebar should not limited to the one specific church, but should provide the history of the movement, both in terms of which it grew from, and how it developed - and spin-off groups are a part of that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:45, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the :Template:Adventism sidebar to the article.  I don't think there can be any problem with that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:53, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is absolutely appropriate.  78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 04:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Adventism template is good. Would you put a Protestant template on the Roman Catholic Church page?  Because that is a similar logic. The Rod is an anti-Adventist group seeking to "reform" the Adventist Church. I've started a major reorg so the history flows and have been removing duplicated info. Legacypac (talk) 06:06, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: "Would you put a Protestant template on the Roman Catholic Church page?", no, but I'd certainly put The Reformation in the "History" section of a "Roman Catholic Church" template.  Anyway, if the Adventism template is good for everyone, I'm good with it.So far, yur changes are looking good.Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:18, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  SDA Template 

message: The first two items are italicized, but the last 3 items are bolded. Is this correct punctuation? I can't decide whether to change them all to either bold or italics for uniformity purposes. --Allison Jean Paully (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed them all to bold, and made a few other formatting changes as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main doctrine section numbered list