Talk:Judaism and Mormonism/Archive 1

message: I tried to edit this page, but then decided that I felt that a good portion of it ought to be revised. I wanted to gather comments before I did so.
First of all I feel too much of the article deals with the various theories on what it means to be a member of or adopted into a tribe of Israel. At best this might be treated in Patriarchal Blessing, if at all.
Refering to comment above, you have my support. Unfortunately not my time to do work on it myself right now.
:Sorry, that's my fault.  I did that as a novice Wikipedia editor.  I have a better idea... - Gilgamesh 23:10, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing this page

message: This page needs to be entirely revamped. I've gutted, after talking to Gilgamesh a good portion of it. Here is my proposed roadmap of this article:
Section 1: Similarities between Judaism and Mormonism.
This ought to cover theological similarities such as a commitment to the observance of commandments
Section 2: Differences...
This ought to cover significant points of disagreement. For example, while Mormonism believes that there are many gods are in existence, and that every person can become a god, though it worships only one. Judaism, on the other hand, believes that there is only one God and that it is not (nor was it) a human.
Section 3: History of relationship between Judaism and Mormonism
This ought to cover things like JS's being taught by a Jewish Rabbi, the baptism for the dead controversy, proselyting in israel and the byu center, etc.
Any suggestions or ideas?--Josiah 04:14, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe what you are talking about gets into apologetics. That's an entirely different subject.--Josiah 23:43, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: No, I don't think so.  Section 2 in discussion attempts to discuss gods and Gods.  They are not equivalent, yet are presented as substantive difference...one is monotheistic and the other not.  This is a typcial misrepresentation when people discuss Mormonism and try to discuss eternal progression i.e. that we as children have the potential to grow to become like our Father.  I would contend the difference alluded to does not exist; they are both monotheistic. Storm Rider 21:38, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been told by Mormons that they avoid the term "monotheistic". Jayjg 22:53, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Road Map 

message: First of all, this page either needs to be renamed to reflect its focus on members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or rewritten to include the various other sects affiliated with the "Latter Day Saint movement" Moogle 03:16, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This page is for the relationship of Mormonism (as a whole) in relation to Judaism (as a whole). I.e. all the sects of both are included.--Josiah 23:42, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latter-day, Latter Day, and Mormon 

message: I have tried to show the similarities and differences between the priesthood in Judaism and Mormonism.  It seems choppy to me, maybe someone with better writing skills can clean it up.  It seems overly important to me to show that Mormonism adheres to the Priesthood as it was established in Gen, Exodus, Numbers, etc.  To my knowledge few or no other christian faiths operate with this respect to both the hebrew text and to the tribe of Levi.
VChapman 5-09-2005 22:49 UTC
:The priesthood "as it was established in Gen, Exodus, Numbers, etc." is hereditary. Jayjg (talk) 00:39, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Priesthood 

message: The star of david is considered a traditional mormon symbol?  As far as I know, and I was a mormon for many years, the window in the assembly hall is the only place it appears.
68.96.173.125 05:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "used chiefly in architecture".  That's where it's traditional. - Gilgamesh 05:14, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Star of David section 

message: There was an edit today, August 1st, regarding the definition of Jew in Mormonism.  It stated that there was a significant difference between the definition presented and what is covered in another article.  Basically, I think the editor, 66.93.130.108, disagreed with the definition that a Jew is anyone from the tribe of Judah.  The article referred to was much more diverse in definition given the differences between orthodoxy through to reform Judaism.  None of the definitions used in the article directly addressed lineage.  However, from the most conservative position, only those from a matrilienal descent may claim the title Jew to those who covert are Jews.  The question I would pose to the editor is, if you trace that lineage of mothers back, where do you find yourself...Yes, that is correct a tribe of Israel.  In effect the definitions are described differently, but you still end up at the same place, which is not significantly different.  If I am wrong, please explain and then please rewrite your edit.  I still think the point is valid, but it is not significant. Storm Rider 06:00, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish Mormons 

message: # Izehar 00:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mormon views about Mormonism and Judaism (current)

message: # gidonb 00:17, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mormonism and Judaism

message: I find the majority of this Anon's edits to be completely POV.  Their last edit included deleting a topic that described LDS support of Israel, taking a statement that stated an individual's lineage was within Judah to be "Mormon-defined".  The statement is the assumption is the individual is from Judah or a Hebrew and has nothing to do with a Mormon definition.  The gist of the statement is if a jew is converted they do not loose their jewish heritage or their ability to claim that heritage in the eyes of the church.  If the Jewish people feel differently that is "their" issue and not a Mormon's.  
:Read the embedded comments - the statement about LDS support of Israel said that Mormons supported peaceful coexistance of Jews and Arabs, and said NOTHING about Jews supporting the same thing. The attempted implication was obvious. As for lineage withing Judah, Jews DO NOT ACCEPT the Mormon definition of "lineage within Judah". Even one of the other LDS editors wrote about a relative of his who was "of the tribe of Judah" but had no Jewish ancestry.  Yes, it is OUR issue. What's your point? 66.93.130.108 14:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is the reference in the comment was a jew converted to Mormonism. As in a jew is a jew with an ancestry that even your narrow view point would consider a jew!  It had nothing to do with tribe affiliation; the gist was when a Jew converts to Mormonism they are still proudly viewed as Jewish.  If the Jewish people wanted to ostracize them for converting that is beside the point.  Going out of the way to attempt to belittle the Jewish individual who converted by stating they were Jewish only as the Mormons would view a Jew is POV and unacceptable.  That was the point! Storm Rider 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please clarify - is the descendant of a Jewish male who has converted to Mormonism and a non-Jewish female considered Jewish by Mormons?  (And, given the statements above, why did you remove the reference to who is a jew???  66.93.130.108 21:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Polytheistic religions were the religions of the time of Abraham. Nothing was said about Mormonism in that paragraph.  As for Jews thinking about Jesus, Jesus HAS NO PLACE in discussions of Jewish theology. That is straight from the soc.culture.jewish FAQ. http://shamash.org/lists/scj-faq/HTML/faq/17-03.html. 66.93.130.108 14:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: This page has been radically changed, without discussion, after I spent months working on it. 66.93.130.108 14:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So now you feel you should be able to make wholesale changes without discussion?  Do you think that is acceptable when you accuse others of having done the same thing?  Put your feelings aside and move on.  You are too good an editor to be caught up in these kinds of actions. Storm Rider 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed two paragraphs, and you or anyone has the right to change them again. (Or at least, that's what I was told when I complained).  I note that your reversions have been themselves reversed, and not by me.  66.93.130.108 21:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Sorry to butt in, but again, this is one example of anons no getting the same respect as registered users. You are good, but need to use consensus to your advantage - which is difficult as an anon user. -Visorstuff 20:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know I'm going to have to do it. 66.93.130.108 21:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Done, and my new name is FiveRings. Ohayo. FiveRings 22:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anon editor 66.93.130.108 

message: Previously hidden text in the article, copied by gidonb 12:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that this self-designed image encapsulates the subject. I would say that it only illustrates the previous bias of the article. gidonb 19:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahhh, Sam Spade is with us, hello Sam, are you a Mormon too? Goodness you sure do get around don't you, whenever it's a topic relating to us little Yehudim? At any rate, haven't heard from you in a while, how's life been lately for you? Quiet or what? IZAK 21:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Enjoy your travels, food and wine and good luck with your exams! ;-) gidonb 00:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Must have worked, 1 A down, and it looks like another on the way... Thanx! Sam Spade 01:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You are welcome. In this case I better wish you good luck again! Anyone else in urgent need of (A)s? Just leave an RfB (request for blessing) on my talk page.... gidonb 01:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: D Sam Spade 04:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion on symbol

message: ::Ahhh, Sam Spade is with us, hello Sam, are you a Mormon too? Goodness you sure do get around don't you, whenever it's a topic relating to us little Yehudim? At any rate, haven't heard from you in a while, how's life been lately for you? Quiet or what? IZAK 21:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Enjoy your travels, food and wine and good luck with your exams! ;-) gidonb 00:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Must have worked, 1 A down, and it looks like another on the way... Thanx! Sam Spade 01:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You are welcome. In this case I better wish you good luck again! Anyone else in urgent need of (A)s? Just leave an RfB (request for blessing) on my talk page.... gidonb 01:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: D Sam Spade 04:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Greetz

message: Similarly, hopefully the Mormon view of the House of Joseph will not remain as a POV article either. IZAK 18:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormon view of the House of Joseph 

message: This article uses the religioustolerance.org website as either a reference or a link. Please see the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org and Wikipedia:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org as to whether Wikipedia should cite the religioustolerance.org website, jguk 14:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello jguk, I do not know about this particular source, but in general I agree with you that we should be concerned with the ease at which personal websources are quoted, just because they have their own domain name and look reputable. I also agree with you that receiving a good recommendation or prize on the web can be based on little more than the looks of one's site or the good intentions as stated by the enterpreneurs. Thank you for raising these doubts. More specifically for this site, many other sources with similar information exist, also some with higher quality. If you wish I will be happy to add some to the resource list of the article. Just drop another note. Best regards, gidonb 15:21, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Religioustolerance.org

message: There was a new entry today, Jan 11, that stated that if an LDS member had joined another church, baptism would be required upon their return to the church.  Can someone please confirm this is true.  Storm Rider 08:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Baptism