This draft was nominated for deletion on 22 March 2024. The result of the discussion was draftify. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mormonism and authority page. |
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page is not a forum for general discussion about personal beliefs, or Apologetics/ Polemics. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about personal beliefs, or Apologetics/ Polemics at the Reference desk. |
This article is a complete mess with weasel words, NPOV issues from both sides, and alot of unsubstantiated accusations followed up by unsubstantiated responses. I will check back soon, and I am seriously considering nominating this article for deletion.( 147.126.46.165 03:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC))
I'm wondering if the title of this article should be narrowed a bit to something like Authoritarianism and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? While some could argue that Joseph Smith's Nauvoo organization was authoritarian, I don't think there's any easy way to make generalizations about the authoritarianism of all post-Smith branches of Mormonism. Some, like the FLDS Church, you might argue are authoritarian to the extreme, while others, like the Community of Christ, are only about as authoritarian as most Protestant churches. COGDEN 22:39, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
POV? Yes, like an article styled "Naïveté, Suckers and Democrats". A title change of this article along the lines you suggest would be more NPOV, but rabid critics probably feel otherwise. — B| Talk 03:57, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
There should be something here about the "Destroying Angels" (Bill Hickman, et al) of the BYoung era. I don't have the expertise to add it, though. MisfitToys 00:29, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)
Would this article be the place to say something about the perceived secretiveness of the LDS? According to hearsay evidence only, I've heard of several ex-Mormons saying certain teachings would only be taught or explained after one gained the right to enter a Mormon Temple, or a certain part of a Mormon Temple, and then they could not be revealed except to others who met the same qualifications. Any truth to these reports? Are they covered in this article or elsewhere? Wesley 17:27, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
After having read this article I am of the opinion that the second half is too unbalanced. It presents a viewpoint linking it to various scriptures. The objective of this article was hardly a dogmatic one, but rather to ascertain whether the LDS church can by standard definitions be viewed as authoritarian, how and why. The rebuttle or counterobservations should be in the same language as the first half. You may wish further the observations beyond protestantism to include other religions such as Judaism, of which Orthodoxy and the authority of rabbis in practise are very similar in nature to that exercised in a centralised manner by the LDS church. However, in the Jewish Orthodoxy case, the authority is often part and parcel of the individual rabbi amplified through his council and Bet Din (religious court).--GKAN--
I read up a little on the Mountain Meadow Massacre and can't seem to find anything that supports the idea that the Mormons who massacred the Pioneers thought they might be killing to DEFEND their land, family or religion. It almost sounds like you are claiming that the specific mormons who were involved in the massacre made a George Bush pre-emptive attack made on the grounds of bad intelligence. It's well documented that Germans believed Hitlers lies, but is the claim legitamtely documented that these particular mormons really felt their land, families, and religion were in danger to this party of roughly 120, or that they were "redeeming Zion" for past wrongs by killing them?
EXCERPT: "Latter Day Saint history in the 1800s has shown that Church members were willing to use violence as a means to defend (whether in response to legitimate evidence or as a result of incorrect perceptions) land, family or religion, as is the case with the Mountain Meadows Massacre and the Battle of Crooked River."
Using the word "defend" sounds like sugar coating for what really happened. I'm not an authority, but feel unless there is someone who is an authority who can verify that the Mormons in that region felt they massacred in defense, then so be it. Obviously they aren't excused, but it would be at least accuratley explained. If it was in self defense then the pioneer party probably would not have seen the Mormons as protection from the indians. It sounds like the pioneer party was never offensive therefore it would be extremely difficult to have "incorrect perceptions" that the pioneer party was there to threaten their land, family or religion. If it was in defense then it probably wouldn't be called a "massacre". I'm Sorry this ever happened; apologies need to be strong. I'm also sorry for being wordy. - jmecham
This is basically an essay. I think this should be merged with criticism of mormonism or deleted (as Criticism of mormonism is basically a pov fork from Anti-Mormonism). gdavies 17:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I have redirected this article based on the suggestions. This appears to be a hate article directed against the LDS Church by Southern Baptists Christian Fundamentalists, who IMHO are 100 times worse than the LDS Church. After all, what does it say about any religion uses a device of torture (Cross) for its symbol. Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 03:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Mormonism and authority. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)