Talk:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/Archive 6

message: I'd dig it if I saw a category or articles that gave history/information on Mormonism as practiced around the world, a la :Category:Roman Catholic Church by country.  Knowing how China treats Catholics I really wanted information on how China treats mormons. This would be a great expansion project for some dedicated editors. SchmuckyTheCat 04:23, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know how China treats Mormons, but my guess is that there are very few. The LDS church has a policy of not proselytizing in countries where doing so is illegal, so my guess is that there are very, very few native Chinese converts. There are some branches in China, but they're all English-speaking, and my guess would be that they are primarily foreign diplomats and business people and their families who are temporarily living in China. Mveric 05:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Au contraire, mon ami! (Forgive my bad french. It's actually more like misplaced ISO characters. Whatever.) The Church has a mission in Hong Kong that (coincidentally?) merged into China when China took Hong Kong back. There's even a temple there. Cernen 20:03, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text: And college students. I met a large number of Chinese students at BYU. While not all convert, there is a significant group that does get baptised. In addition, there must be some sort of "recognition" with an LDS temple in Hong Kong, but the church would not be allowed to prostelytize on the mainland... -Visorstuff 13:42, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mormonism by country

message: I was perusing the article and ran across the statement in the finances section, that the church ownes and operates the largest beef ranch in the US/world.  Well that isn't true...  The King Ranch in Texas is a 'bit' larger at 825,000 acres. http://www.king-ranch.com/index_ie.htm
I don't know how you would like to correct the information.  I don't know if you can say that it is the second largest as there isn't a list of top 10 ranches out there I could find.  
It is a very large ranch by any measure but not the largest.
:Agree we should change or clarify. Do you know which is larger in production? -Visorstuff 21:55, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Beef Ranch... 

message: It is very interesting to find there is no reference in this article to Freemasonry, which is where almost all of the ritual in Mormon worship derives it's origin, even down to the under-garments and the symbolism thereof.  Has anyone considered investigating this further, or is such discussion offensive to Mormons?  Jachin 14:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: With as much information as there is on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Wikipedia, it cannot all be contained on one page.  The relationship of Joseph Smith, Jr. with Freemasonry is explored on the endowment article.  The similarities that you have brought up are explored on the Mormonism and Freemasonry article. These things have not been ignored. Val42 20:51, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
... [Comment by Trenidor] I don't think it's in anyway related to freemasonry, All of the beliefs are contained in already published and readily accessable sources such as: The Church's Magazines, The Book of Mormon, the Docterin and Covenants, as well as the many Confrence talks and any published work by the church. All of which can be found on the LDS website. The Temple Garment thing is in the D&C, the fact of the matter is that most people don't realize all the things untill someone points them out, which is one of the reasons they are considered sacred.
...[Comment from Keith_M] i understand where you're comming from but it is just as equally plausable for the practice of wearing ritualistic garments to have came from the american indian. being indian myself, spirit shirts are incredibly close to the same practice of undergarment wearing by both LDS members and that of other religions. Considering many of the early church missionaries taught the american indians because they were considered a special people, and thus the practice could have been "borrowed" that way aswell. however it is my belief that the LDS church did not "borrow" their practices from anyone. The church and its practices are restored, what once was is now again. if we think of a glass vase that was dropped and we try to put it back together the way i put it together will be similiar to the way you would have put it back together..much with the same pieces..but with some variation, the LDS church however has been restored to the same church that existed both in the eastern and western continents during Christs life on the earth. logically as the church apostated, practices were changed but others stayed the same. as everyone tries to put the gospel back together from its apostate state, many things will be similiar but not quite exactly the same. The LDS church is whole and contains all the pieces.
To say that nearly all ritual come from freemasonry is ridiculous.  Lets name a few mormon rituals.  Baptism, Laying on of hands to receive the Holy Spirit, The Sacrament, blessing of the sick, prayer, fasting, etc.  Even in the temple most of the rituals don't even resemble masonry, for example, Baptism for the dead, Washings and annointings and Marriage for eternity for the living and the dead.  The only one that contains similarities is the endowment.  That is a far cry from all.  Epachamo 19:47, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Freemasonry

message: From what I know about the Perpetual Education Fund, it is primarily for use by poorer members in poorer areas of the world.  Additionally, my perception is that it isn't meant for any members in the United States or Canada.  Does anyone have information to support or refute my perceptions?  I think that we should discuss it here and filter such information for placing it in the main article. Val42 18:33, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
There is an article in the Deseret News today about the Perpetual Education Fund. It says that the Fund has given 24,000 loans this year. 
Regarding what countries funds have been provided to, Elder Carmack gave a lis: "Mexico, Central and South America, the Philippines, the Caribbean, Cambodia, Mongolia and India, with plans to expand into west Africa, central Europe, Russia, Tonga, Samoa and Fiji." http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,615154075,00.html Sreed1234 00:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Perpetual Education Fund

message: Merrill J. Bateman, a member of First Quorum of the Seventy, appeared Wednesday [August 30, 2005] on KUER's RadioWest program to respond to The Salt Lake Tribune series "Mormons in Utah: The Shrinking Majority" published in July. In his interview with Doug Fabrizio, Bateman states: "The twelve million members are those who've been baptized and confirmed, or those who are children of record from zero to eight. So that's the total membership of the church."
As such, it appears that the 12 million number constitutes both baptized members AND "children of record".
TrustTruth 20:29, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What constitutes the 12 million members 

message: These have been reverted several times by several different people, all for the same reason: although they may well form the basis of worthwhile additions to the article, they are stated in strongly POV terms.  -- Just zis Guy, you know? 10:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by 71.38.227.189 

message: That wonderful, in-depth analysis has again been referred to in the article.  Most recently by Saint17 and an anon, 67.186.207.85.  First of all, the survey was conducted by dialing 50,281 homes in the 47 contiguous United States.  Second, it is already referred to towards the bottom of the article.  Third, what the survey postulates is "Some groups such as Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses appear to attract a large number of converts ("in-switchers"), but also nearly as large a number of apostates ("out-switchers")."  
PLEASE NOTE: the survey does not say more are leaving than are joining the LDS church.  It is limited to 48 states whereas the LDS church is worldwide; in fact there are more outside the US than in the US.  If you are not going to read the survey/study, it is best not to attempt to refer to it.  Storm Rider 15:51, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious Analysis??? 

message: Copied from Wikipedia:General complaints
Overall I am impressed with your article on the LDS church. HOwever, at the very beginning of the article when you are listing the basic beliefs of the church, of the 'Largest sect' as you call it, headquartered in Salt Lake city, you are incorrect in including the practice of Plural Marriage.
The church no longer practices plural marriage, nor does the church endorse the practice of plural marriage today. Those members who engage in this practice are excommunicated from the LDS church. I refer you to the Church's official website www.lds.org
(below is an excerpt taken from the Official Church website) In 1998, President Gordon B. Hinckley made the following statement about the Church's position on plural marriage: "This Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church. . . . If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church."
At various times, the Lord has commanded His people to practice plural marriage. For example, He gave this command to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon (Doctrine and Covenants 132:1).
In this dispensation, the Lord commanded some of the early Saints to practice plural marriage. The Prophet Joseph Smith and those closest to him, including Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball, were challenged by this command, but they obeyed it. Church leaders regulated the practice. Those entering into it had to be authorized to do so, and the marriages had to be performed through the sealing power of the priesthood. In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff received a revelation that the leaders of the Church should cease teaching the practice of plural marriage (Official Declaration 1).
This issue should be placed in the article's discussion tab or errors might be fixed (edited) yourself, with discussions or references where appropriate. This page does not concern content of articles. --moxon 18:00, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article on the LDS church has a large factual error 

message: Is it just me, or is that second to last paragraph, under History, misplaced? Could it perhaps be merged or moved into the Scriptures section? It reads as follows:
::Church members (and others in the Latter Day Saint movement) believe in additional scriptural canon, making them unique among Christian religions. Chief among these is The Book of Mormon, which members testify is a record that was kept by ancient prophets who lived in the Americas and was engraved on gold plates, translated by the power of God through the Urim and Thummim. Eleven witnesses signed testimonies of its divine authenticity, which are now included in the preface to The Book of Mormon.  Eight handled the plates when shown them, and three more testified to having seen an angel present them and to have heard God bear witness to its truth. A history of revelations given to the church primarily through Joseph Smith are also published as The Doctrine and Covenants.  
Trevdna 03:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm..., I think it might need to be moved (or merged), but I also think we should wait for a few more editors to weigh in on this.The Scurvy Eye 20:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misplaced paragraph 

message: The edit by 68.116.236.198 seems to be for self-promotion, so I have reverted it.
172.133.115.71, your edits are clearly not acceptable to many others.  If you feel that they are an important contribution and should be included in the article, please state your case here so that it may be discussed before making further edits.  The Jade Knight 04:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by 68.116.236.198 & 172.133.115.71 

message: I have read through the discussions on this page, and it seems that there is a lot of friction caused by confusing the idea of "what is true?" with "what does the church teach?"  I know as a faithful LDS member drawing this distinction is not entirely comfortable.  But as Wikipedia editors we must be capable of doing it.  For any point of doctrine, expressing the "truth" may be possible or may not be possible.  But expressing either the "general current belief", the "official correlated teaching", or the "scriptural statements" is almost certainly possible.  Repenting of adultery, murder, and so forth?  Forget what you personally believe and try to simply craft an accurate and relevant statement regarding LDS views on the matter.  Becoming as God?  Do the same.  What the church teaches, or from a different angle, what most Mormons currently seem to believe, is not really that hard to determine.  Tom Haws 00:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the problems with this is that many editors feel that in order to keep NPOV and be as "truthful" as possible requires not only including what the church teaches, but what the church taught.  Many seem to think that anything a General Authority ever says = something the church teaches/taught.  The Jade Knight 03:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The root of that problem is in defining the scope of an article and knowing our audience.  Why would a reader happen by the article?  What would we as the owner of Wikipedia as a whole hope to offer a reader in the article?  We have to put on our Wikipedian hat.   Tom Haws 03:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree.  I think readers may come looking for various things, however.  Some people may be interested in learning what the Church is, or its scope.  Some may be interested in trying to discover what Mormons truly do and do not believe (having heard many things).  Some may be coming to try to dig up "dirt" about the Church to push their view.  Some may come trying to verify certain "facts" they have heard (perhaps true, perhaps not).  Some may be Latter Day Saints of other denominations trying to learn more about "the Utah Church".  How do we fit all of this in an article, keep NPoV, and stay true to the facts and keep everything relevant without some involved discussions?  The Jade Knight 05:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Some involved discussions are very very neccessary. It is worth the pain. -Visorstuff 15:13, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for that reminder!  Most of us need it (I certainly do). The Scurvy Eye 18:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Separating the ideas of "doctrine" and "truth"

message: Some questions have been raised about Mormon beliefs at Talk:End times.  There seems to be no page that discusses Latter Day Saints eschatology generally.  I have looked, perhaps too superficially, for LDS beliefs about the Last Judgment and the Second Coming.  I am also wondering if any LDS members or groups have been influenced by the sort of dispensationalist end-times beliefs — generally, the belief that the Second Coming may be imminent, and that recent historical events are signs that it is drawing closer — that are prevalent among many Americans generally.  Is there a Mormon literature about end-times belief that I should acquaint myself with?  Smerdis of Tlön 05:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In short:  From its foundation, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have generally believed that they lived in the "last days" (thus the appelation "Latter-day Saints").  I am unaware of any single book that discusses Mormon eschatology exhaustively, though I am sure bits and pieces of it can be found in many places.  However, this website may be helpful:  http://ldslastdays.com/  I have only looked at one or two articles on it, myself, but, if nothing else, the webmaster may be better able to point you in the right direction.  The Jade Knight 08:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, this is most helpful.  Smerdis of Tlön 16:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to check out http://www.whyprophets.com as well. Look at The Future section under Beasts and Horns from the "Start Here" contents page and you should be able to get around pretty easily. But remember that a lot of that is just the author's opinion and not official doctrine. There are some good pages with comparison of general Protestantisms views of the end times, the rapture, etc. Cookiecaper 16:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

text: "Jesus the Christ" by James E. Talmage would also be a good source.  Val42 22:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions at [[end times]] 

message: I don't seem to see much about LDS beliefs regarding the Second Coming.  I believe this deserves some attention.  However, I'd like to hear your ideas on the matter before doing something about it. The Scurvy Eye 22:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so.  Anyone else's thoughts? The Scurvy Eye 20:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Exactly, that's why I think it deserves a whole article by itself.  I intend to start writing soon (I'm a sophomore in high school, with lots of homework:))The Scurvy Eye 04:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay, another article would be great and all, but I'm arguing that a good portion of that can also be included in the current LDS Church article. First of all, does anyone know Wikipedia's guidelines on the duplication of information? Let us all know when you start the article so the community can begin editing and expanding on your start and a link can be appropriately placed in the LDS Church article. By the way, homework is terrible excuse. :) Wikipedia is live to the world, man! I propose that we don't abandon the idea of including a Perspective of Second Coming section, and really consider to incorporate it into the current LDS Church article, but I need some support here. Thoughts? --Piewalker 17:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree competely that we should add a section on it. What I meant was that a lot of those sections have articles by themselves, so I was suggesting the same thing with this.-The Scurvy Eye 20:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text:  Agreed. Any other opinions? --Piewalker 20:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Coming 

message: I moved this to  User_talk:206.180.134.162 since it isn't an effort to improve (or discuss improving) the article. Thanks to those who answered!!! Trödeltalk 01:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormon/Christian Science question 

message: I'd like to direct the attention of any interested parties to the section at the bottom of the ERA talk page. I noticed the absence of any mention of the LDS's involvement, and I'd like the gap filled, but I'm not sure I'm the right person to do this. Any takers? Alienus 01:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  LDS vs. ERA