Talk:Mormon (word)/Archive 2

message: If you want the actual truth about anything to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, please visit
www.mormon.org  This is a website designed by The Church specifically to answer questions on basic beleifs and facts about the church. It should be noted that mormon.org is biased in order to gain followers. They at no point on the site state their beleif that Jesus was in North America. They also avoid answers and do not seek out opinions of non-church members.
www.lds.org  This is the official site for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- 199.243.201.203, 18:35, 14 June 2006
:Or more accurately, part of the truth. --Kmsiever 04:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, you must be so happy with the knowledge that any second you can cease to exist.  Seriously, even if evolution really happened(which it didn't), why would you want to believe that?66.58.206.228 00:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The discussion page is used to discuss ideas and concepts about the article.  We appreciate your personal beliefs and feelings, but they are more appropriately shared on your talk page.  Cheers.  Storm Rider (talk) 10:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dang dude, thats rude to say to others that their wrong*points at 204*. You know scientist have been wrong before, and for all you know we could say your the ignorant one.--Animasage 20:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The first word in a title is always capitalized.66.58.206.228 00:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Get the facts 

message: The link doesn't further the definition of the article. It's neither scholarly nor notable, and therefore no more valuable than any of the other 14.1 million sites (Google search: "Mormon", 22 Jun 06) on the captioned topic. --AuntieMormom 02:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link w/o consensus 

message: This topic is appropriate for an encyclopedia; however, popular culture references are the equivalent of reading the National Enquirer and other rags of its ilk.  These pop culture references in serious articles should be removed everywhere - see the recent discussion starting here on the mailing list -- Storm Rider (talk) 07:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular Culture and Encyclopedic articles

message: :::This page and all LDS pages should be merged under the title Mormonism. All LDS pages are talking  about Joseph Smith's teachings, the page is about his teachings anyway, so that goes to reason they read the book of Mormon therfore Mormons.You may want to seperate your modern church from its past however its past can't be changed. The current "big" branch is still preaching about Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and they were part of the Latter Day Saint movement, Church and Mormonism.
:This is not the main reason I suggest the change however. They should be merged because all the other religions I've read about on Wikipedia include the movements or beginings, middles and currents on their main (only) page. As in Buddist getting only a Buddism page, Hindus getting only a Hindism page and so on. If they are not merged then I feel that all of the other religions should have similar adjustment to the Mormons. As Mormonism has three (3) different listings as of today, Sept. 26 2006, Latter day Saint Movement,Latter day saints and Mormons. They should all be listed under Mormanism. Anarcism, Capitalism, Communism have many forms but only one (1) page each.
:::lol: I was wrong there are nine (9) pages on Momonism as of today (maybe more are hiding) Latter day Saint Movement,Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ,History of the Latter Day Saint movement,Jesus in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Missions of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Mormon, Mormonism, and there are lists with (small) pages of even more sects. I'd be willing to wager that all of the different branches not only follow the book of Mormon, but also all but one originated in Utah.
:::Joeseph Smith's MORMONISM and the book of Mormon is what all the above pages are all refering to.
:::And a quote from Latter Day Saint movement page shows the connection."The Latter Day Saint movement spawned many religious denominations, some of which include a set of doctrines, practices, and cultures collectively known as Mormonism, although some do not accept the designation Mormon."
There is a link to this article from the Exmormonism article, backed up in the discussion section of Exmormonism. It seems only logical that there should be a link back. greenw47
:There has not been any comments on this section in a while.  It will be difficult to find out exactly how long because no one dated their comments.  I'm going to remove the merge-tag. Personally, I think that "Mormonism" should be merged to "Latter Day Saint movement". Val42 02:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Mormonism 

message: I like to find out what's the total population of Mormons...or members of the LDS church in the US. According to the Wikipedia Utah article, over 70 percent (or close to three/fourths) of the state's population are Mormon, despite the US census don't collect any demographic data on religious denomination. The highest number of Mormons of any state goes to California at one million. I appreciate anyone to include demographic data on how many Mormons in the US. 63.3.14.129 04:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormon population in the US 

message: I really liked this article because it went in to the correct subject.  The term "Mormon" and what it means historically.  But I don't like the Beliefs section because it just encourages the addition to any and every doctrine to be put here.  I think there are plenty of links to get people started on their quest for doctrinal belief and practices without the Articles of Faith presented here.  Not to mention there is already an articls about the Articles of Faith.  If no one objects, I would like the section removed.  I will check back later. Bytebear 01:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This happens on a lot of church related articles.  Editors seem compelled to add excess information when they should just stick to the exact subject and link or "See also" all the related articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Storm Rider (talk • contribs) 02:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know. If you have those 13 fairly short sentences up that's really all you need for doctrine. it's pretty succinct and should probably stay as a good summary of the church's doctrine.203.131.167.26 10:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that the Articles of faith shouldn't be here.  This article seems to be discussing a variety of claimed mormon groups, and the articles of faith are mainly a focus of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  A list of links leading to doctrines would be better. Wrad 02:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly disagree.  Joseph Smith, as the one common force behind the Latter-Day Saint movement, is the author of these thirteen articles.  All Mormon sects have a common root in the teachings of Joseph Smith.  Certainly the idea that the articles of faith are only accepted by the CoJCoLDS is unreasonable as this took place before the succession crisis (and consequently before the existence of a sect under that name). gdavies 07:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles of Faith? 

message: I don't know where you found out that the term Amish was wrongly translated into Mormon in the movie Witness with Harrison Ford, but I don't think that this is the truth regarding the French translation. The first time I saw that movie, it was the French version of it, I didn't speak English at that time and I it was clear to me that the action was taking place in an Amish community. Therefore, I can't imagine that the translation error is true. I can't tell for the other translated versions of the movie. 
--Vbrachet 22:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just looking at a blog  there are comments by ironically enough, witnesses that say it was French (Belgium), Italian, and Polish.  Here is another reference to the French translation Bytebear 06:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the wrong translation of Amish into Mormon in the movie "Witness" in French, Spanish etc.  

message: I added this text to the LDS texts section in the side bar.  Why was it removed?  It is/was an important text in early Mormon history. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.59.46.243 (talk) 02:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, it appears to be back now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.59.46.243 (talk) 03:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it's gone again.  Anyone know why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.191.17.168 (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just went to see who was removing it, but I couldn't find any edits from your ip adress (either of them) and no edits on from the 15th to the 17th that put this into the LDS texts box... gdavies 19:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put it back up, but it was removed yet again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.191.19.42 (talk) 01:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, there is no edit from your IP address and this change was never made... see this article's history. gdavies 07:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: You're looking at the wrong article's history, gdavis. It's in Template:LDS, and the Strang book has indeed been added and removed, but it doesn't seem to have a good explaination for when it's removed, just that it's "NOT" a Latter Day Saint text. I have no strong sympathies; I can see arguments either way, but because Strang's groups is so small and he already has a link, maybe leave it out? Cool Hand Luke 07:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: how embarassing... haha, yeah sorry about that.  I think that the link to the Strangites suffices as well, these boxes are getting a little cramped. gdavies 17:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book of the Law of the Lord (Strangite) 

message: Although I see that the article is supposed to be semi-protected, it doesn't seem to be preventing unregistered or new users from vandalizing it. Am I misunderstanding the meaning of the tag? Bochica 01:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The semi protection was only set for three days. I've protected it for another week (until Feb 17 this time). (Semi-)protected pages are considered harmful, but I don't foresee anonymous vandalism ever letting up on pages like this.  It does look to be a little better though, and maybe moreso after another week. Cool Hand Luke 17:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

text: We're getting a big surge of vandalism again, so I'm going to semi-protect again, at least for a while. COGDEN 22:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Semi-protected?? 

message: Simply put, the sentence:
"Mormons believe in Christ as the Savior of the world, and are therefore Christians, although they are not recognized as such by some groups.[4][5]"
is taking one side over another in a theological dispute.  Such a declaration has no place in an NPOV article.  Noting that Mormons consider themselves Christians while other groups do not is necessary, but stating openly that Mormons are, in fact Christian, though other groups fail to recognize them as such, just pushes the Mormon POV at the expense of neutrality.R.E.S.A. 02:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By that same argument, then the Christianity page should say that Christianity "claims to be" or "self-identifies" as monotheistic since many outside of Christianity challenge this. On the other hand, I do agree that the causal relation in that sentence is problematic. In reality, I should have reverted back to the [long standing version], which simply states that they "describe themselves as Christian," and I apologize for not doing so. This statement is the most neutral and leaves the larger, more complex debate for further down in the article and for the separate religion pages as the term Mormon covers more than one church within the Latter Day Saint Movement, and the categorization is debated even within the rest of Christianity and in the secular world. --FyzixFighter 03:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Controversial Positions As Fact 

message: "Largely by a prophet-warrior-historian named Mormon..."
Mormon only wrote 12 or so chapters, which accounts for only a small part of the book. However, he is recognized as being the last person to write in the book, regardless of how little/much he wrote. Stealthymatt 18:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The entire sentence you quote is: "According to the religion's founder Joseph Smith, Jr., this book was written on golden plates, largely by a prophet-warrior-historian named Mormon, who the book says was killed in a great battle between pre-Columbian civilizations during the 4th century."  This is accurate; according to Joseph Smith and the book's own claims, Mormon is the person who abridged the numerous Nephite records and wrote his abridged version onto the golden plates, so his writings constitute the bulk of the text of the entire Book of Mormon.  alanyst /talk/ 19:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, sorry I misinterpreted it. It may (unless already done) need a clarification. Also, he wasn't the last, he was the 2nd to last (his son Moroni wrote the last section). Stealthymatt 19:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect