Re: [Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
On 4/4/07, Thomas Haws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Wikipedia answer (yes, there is an answer), is to cite authorities
and experts, and if there is significant disagreement on a subject, be
sure to cite all sides fairly and sympathetically.
Regarding the specific passage in question here, an applicable
official Wikipedia policy might be "No original research" [[WP:NOR]].
In other words, if no scholarly or ecclesiastical source can be found
that discusses the idea, you have good backing to request that the
article not "go there". Simply cite [[WP:NOR]] (after reading it, of
course) and say, "Cite your sources, or please leave it out."
There are so many facts (citations of existing sources) to be added to
Wikipedia that there is really no time to be arguing for interesting
original conclusions.
Would my current statement on there be proper? I figure while people
are so interested in keeping Mormons on there, that I just be honest
about the Mormon position with cited sources so all can see what we
really believe. If any have sources that contradict my points on
there, please feel free to discuss them on the "discuss" page.
Or would it just be better to remove it with [[WP:NOR]] as you suggest?
Jesse
--
#!/usr/bin/perl
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$ 0gFzD gD, 00Fz,
0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
#y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
___
Ldsoss mailing list
Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org
http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
What would be the proper forum on which to debate such doctinal questions? Should it be moderated? Is it a problem that none of the participants are authorized to speak for the Church? The Wikipedia answer (yes, there is an answer), is to cite authorities and experts, and if there is significant disagreement on a subject, be sure to cite all sides fairly and sympathetically. Regarding the specific passage in question here, an applicable official Wikipedia policy might be "No original research" [[WP:NOR]]. In other words, if no scholarly or ecclesiastical source can be found that discusses the idea, you have good backing to request that the article not "go there". Simply cite [[WP:NOR]] (after reading it, of course) and say, "Cite your sources, or please leave it out." There are so many facts (citations of existing sources) to be added to Wikipedia that there is really no time to be arguing for interesting original conclusions. -- Tom Haws Have a beautiful day. ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 18:11:59 -0600 "Jesse Stay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >That's pretty correct, but it doesn't support how we can be compared >to the teachings of Arius. [snip] my bad for posting in a way that might lead to a doctrinal debate. Wiki is the poster child for a new era of collaborative content creation. Managing the inevitable disagreement that arises is one of the big challenges. What would be the proper forum on which to debate such doctinal questions? Should it be moderated? Is it a problem that none of the participants are authorized to speak for the Church? In the past this stuff has been confined to the high priests group meeting... ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
That's pretty correct, but it doesn't support how we can be compared
to the teachings of Arius. I do not think we believe Christ is
subordinate to the Father, but One with the Father, as all other
Christian faiths believe (minus the 1 being and Spirit thing). We
also do not believe that at one time Jesus did not exist. We were
intelligences forever, and all have existed forever. I think if you
were to study what Arius actually taught you would see he wasn't
necessarily teaching this thing either. Arius taught that Christ was
created out of nothing, not begotten, and he taught against the
doctrine of eternity. He also taught that Christ was not of the same
substance as the father (Hence the entire reason for the Nicene
Creed). We believe that Christ, born with a body, was of the same
substance of the Father. The thing is, with so many things lost in
the Christian religions, the secular view of Arius is much different
than ours, so we can easily get pegged in the category that follow his
teachings. I don't think we really want to be in that category
though, as Arius, I think even among Mormons, would be a heretic.
The references I've listed on the discussion page (and now in the
article) go over all this in detail. It's a great paper I've linked
to in there - I highly recommend reading it if you haven't.
Jesse
On 4/4/07, Peter Whiting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 04:30:12PM -0600, Jesse Stay wrote:
> On 4/1/07, Jesse Stay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >One other example is the topic "Arianism". Mormons are listed as
> >supporters of Arius on wikipedia. If you think we actually are, I
> >highly suggest you research what Arius actually taught, as I really
> >don't think we want ourselves in that category. Were he to preach
> >today I'm pretty sure we too would see him as a heretic as the early
> >Christians did. I tried to remove us myself from there, even
> >including strong evidences and references as to why we shouldn't be
> >included, but it promptly got put back in, with no good reference as
> >to why we're included.
>
> I have stated my point against Mormons supporting Arius here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arianism#Mormons_Support_Arius.3F
>
> I have also removed Mormons from the list under:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#.22Arian.22_as_a_polemical_epithet
>
> Any support and help from those on the list in keeping it the way it
> is now will be very appreciated. The last time it was put back with
> no reason why.
It is back, and IMO it is well worded. From the section "Arian as
a polemical epithet":
"Like the Arians, many groups have embraced the belief that Jesus
is not the one God, but a separate being subordinate to the
Father, and that Jesus at one time did not exist."
and just before the list:
"The group so labeled do not hold beliefs identical to Arianism.
For this reason, they do not use the name as a self-description,
even if they acknowledge that their beliefs are at points in
agreement with, or in broad terms similar to, Arianism.
"Those whose religious beliefs have been compared to or labeled as
Arianism include:"
and finally, the mormon listing states:
"Mormons, followers of the various churches of the Latter Day
Saint movement, who believe in the unity in purpose of the
Godhead but that Jesus is a divine being distinct from, and
created by, God the Father, but similar in every other respect
(thus roughly Homoiousian rather than Anomoean). Thus, Jesus is
literally (physically, by God placing his own seed within Mary,
thus making Jusus both mortal and divinity) the Firstborn of the
Father. Also in line with Arianism, Mormons believe that the
pre-incarnate Jesus (the Logos of John 1) created the Earth under
the direction of the Father. In fact, they go further than most
on this point, equating the pre-existent Jesus with Jehovah,
the God of the Old Testament (perhaps as a spokesman for the
Father, for whom they reserve the Old Testament title Elohim).
Although the LDS Church views the doctrinal schisms of the late
Roman Empire as a sure sign of the Great Apostasy, they do not
officially claim any allegiance to Arius."
Looks right to me.
___
Ldsoss mailing list
Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org
http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
--
#!/usr/bin/perl
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$ 0gFzD gD, 00Fz,
0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
#y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
___
Ldsoss mailing list
Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org
http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 04:30:12PM -0600, Jesse Stay wrote: > On 4/1/07, Jesse Stay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >One other example is the topic "Arianism". Mormons are listed as > >supporters of Arius on wikipedia. If you think we actually are, I > >highly suggest you research what Arius actually taught, as I really > >don't think we want ourselves in that category. Were he to preach > >today I'm pretty sure we too would see him as a heretic as the early > >Christians did. I tried to remove us myself from there, even > >including strong evidences and references as to why we shouldn't be > >included, but it promptly got put back in, with no good reference as > >to why we're included. > > I have stated my point against Mormons supporting Arius here: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arianism#Mormons_Support_Arius.3F > > I have also removed Mormons from the list under: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#.22Arian.22_as_a_polemical_epithet > > Any support and help from those on the list in keeping it the way it > is now will be very appreciated. The last time it was put back with > no reason why. It is back, and IMO it is well worded. From the section "Arian as a polemical epithet": "Like the Arians, many groups have embraced the belief that Jesus is not the one God, but a separate being subordinate to the Father, and that Jesus at one time did not exist." and just before the list: "The group so labeled do not hold beliefs identical to Arianism. For this reason, they do not use the name as a self-description, even if they acknowledge that their beliefs are at points in agreement with, or in broad terms similar to, Arianism. "Those whose religious beliefs have been compared to or labeled as Arianism include:" and finally, the mormon listing states: "Mormons, followers of the various churches of the Latter Day Saint movement, who believe in the unity in purpose of the Godhead but that Jesus is a divine being distinct from, and created by, God the Father, but similar in every other respect (thus roughly Homoiousian rather than Anomoean). Thus, Jesus is literally (physically, by God placing his own seed within Mary, thus making Jusus both mortal and divinity) the Firstborn of the Father. Also in line with Arianism, Mormons believe that the pre-incarnate Jesus (the Logos of John 1) created the Earth under the direction of the Father. In fact, they go further than most on this point, equating the pre-existent Jesus with Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament (perhaps as a spokesman for the Father, for whom they reserve the Old Testament title Elohim). Although the LDS Church views the doctrinal schisms of the late Roman Empire as a sure sign of the Great Apostasy, they do not officially claim any allegiance to Arius." Looks right to me. ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
Be sure to mention what you did at the LDS project
[[WP:LDS]]
On 4/4/07, Jesse Stay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/1/07, Jesse Stay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One other example is the topic "Arianism". Mormons are listed as
> supporters of Arius on wikipedia. If you think we actually are, I
> highly suggest you research what Arius actually taught, as I really
> don't think we want ourselves in that category. Were he to preach
> today I'm pretty sure we too would see him as a heretic as the early
> Christians did. I tried to remove us myself from there, even
> including strong evidences and references as to why we shouldn't be
> included, but it promptly got put back in, with no good reference as
> to why we're included.
I have stated my point against Mormons supporting Arius here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arianism#Mormons_Support_Arius.3F
I have also removed Mormons from the list under:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#.22Arian.22_as_a_polemical_epithet
Any support and help from those on the list in keeping it the way it
is now will be very appreciated. The last time it was put back with
no reason why.
Jesse
--
#!/usr/bin/perl
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$ 0gFzD gD, 00Fz,
0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
#y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
___
Ldsoss mailing list
Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org
http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
--
Tom Haws
Have a beautiful day.
___
Ldsoss mailing list
Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org
http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
[Ldsoss] Re: wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
On 4/1/07, Jesse Stay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One other example is the topic "Arianism". Mormons are listed as
supporters of Arius on wikipedia. If you think we actually are, I
highly suggest you research what Arius actually taught, as I really
don't think we want ourselves in that category. Were he to preach
today I'm pretty sure we too would see him as a heretic as the early
Christians did. I tried to remove us myself from there, even
including strong evidences and references as to why we shouldn't be
included, but it promptly got put back in, with no good reference as
to why we're included.
I have stated my point against Mormons supporting Arius here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Arianism#Mormons_Support_Arius.3F
I have also removed Mormons from the list under:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#.22Arian.22_as_a_polemical_epithet
Any support and help from those on the list in keeping it the way it
is now will be very appreciated. The last time it was put back with
no reason why.
Jesse
--
#!/usr/bin/perl
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$ 0gFzD gD, 00Fz,
0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
#y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
___
Ldsoss mailing list
Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org
http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] ASP.Net?
That reminds me that Care For Life USA-Mozambique could really use some occasional LAMP/PHP programming help for our Family Preservation Program. -It's intended to be Open Source, with a global view. -We are currently working on speed-optimal, server-side only validated web data entry forms. -We are currenlty working on adding functionality to our progress indicator graphing web app. Tom ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
[Ldsoss] ASP.Net?
I'm trying to find someone to help with a non-profit website written in ASP.Net. If you are that person or know someone, could you please contact me off list? I'd appreciate your help. Best regards, Richard ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
