From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Different movements within Mormonism[change source]

I just did a large edit on this article. Among other things, I removed the sentence: "Within the church, there are different movements that arose after questions of succession."

While it is quite true that there are other churches within Mormonism, the article seems to be specifically about the largest movement of Mormonism, namely, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For example, the beliefs section says that Mormons don't drink coffee or alcohol, and that only faithful Mormons can go in their temples. Both of these beliefs do not apply to all other movements.

The answer would seem to be a completely new article about Mormonism as a whole, with this article being renamed The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

However, since this is a simplified Wikipedia, I don't know if that is even necessary. Especially when you consider that over 95% of the followers of Mormonism are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

-- Unsigned comment above by User:

Yes, it is true that this is the Simple English Wikipedia. It might also be true, that over 95% of "Mormons" are within the "Church you mention. My personal opinion of SE Wikipedia is that the simple refers to the language used, not to the facts stated. I would therefore propse that the fact, that some Mormons believe different things, and have (possibly) split from the "Mainstream" church be re-added to the article. Someone who knows better than me (I am not Mormon, and generally know very little about the Faiths of America) might even be able to point out what the differences in the beliefs are. Wikipedia is not about saying this is right, and that is wrong. Wikipedia is about cultural diversity. This means to at least say what the options are. -- Eptalon 22:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I added a section about different non-LDS Mormons, please extend as you see fit. -- Eptalon 22:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Cult[change source]

We should get that word out of this article. zephyr2k 23:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the cult part. zephyr2k 02:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
It is a religion based on encarta online. See link: [1]. zephyr2k 02:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Different sources give different views. We should stick to the view by EN as it depicts how its adherents, Christians and other people view it.-- Tdxiang 02:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
yes, but as with the rule in EN, you cannot remove information that comes from reliable sources, but you can add to it. zephyr2k 02:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

NPOV[change source]

I tagged the article with {NPOV} as recent edits certainly lean away from from being neutral. I also removed a statement about Smith teaching polygamy as while he believed in it, there is nothing supporting polygamy being taught in LDS until the 1850's (years after Smith death). Also as this is a 170+ year old religion with more than 10 million members world wide and is the 4th largest religious group in the United States, I have to question defining it as a cult. Sect would be pushing it, but certainly not a cult.-- Creol 23:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

'Sect or Cult imo are not defined about how many members there are, but rather with their teachings. For each of the following, ask yourself, if you see it as a sect or a cult: en:Osho-Rajneesh movement,en:Scientology, en:Branch Davidian,en:Raëlism,en:Opus Dei
Also look at it another way, the Protestants split from the Catholics, which in turn split from the Christian orthodox Church. Therefore, Catholics and Protestants are Sects, or Cults?

Of those listed, I would say religion, cult, sect-turned-cult, cult, sect. Cult by definition is "outside the mainstream". Mormonism is practically the standard in Utah, and mainstream in Idaho (approx 20-25% of the state is mormon). This would be akin to England in the 17th-18th century with Protestant christianity.
While not mainstream worldwide, It is mainstream in a relatively large geographical area. World wide its members combine for a greater population than countries such as Greece or Cuba (CIA World book list would place it between 64th and 71st in population by country). Would a national religion of one of those countries be counted as a cult and more importantly would it be an unbaised worldview to label it as such?
Sect, as i said, would be a stretch as while it does meet the criteria as off-shoot of a religion, it doesnt meet the "small group of people" designator which is most often used to define a sect. Of the three, Mormonism is as valid a choice to use "Religion" as Protestant is, though a 4th option may be the most neutral of choices which most people could agree on: "Religion Group"
And as I was typing when that last part entered: Sect, sect. (turned Religion over time) :) -- Creol 22:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

This article is not negative[change source]

I do not think that this article is negative in the least bit. It is a very truthfull article. The reason why I made the edits that you call negative is because this was portraying Mormonism as being a regular, orthodox christian group when its really not. Amost all of the mormon teaching go against the bible. So why should I have let it be if the article had false info.--Sir James Paul 01:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The changes you have made show a strong Christian bias on this article as well as many of the others you have edited. Your attempt to remove what you feel is false information included adding false information of your own. As to the article being negative, what are you talking about?? The only usage of the word negative is in your edits. -- Creol 01:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you are offended but what I wrote is all truthful. If you have the problem with the truth about mormonism don't red the article. I know more than you on the subject--Sir James Paul 02:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Dear Sir, although you may know more, your edits potray it as being nagative. Try to be neutral, okay? Don't forget that EVERYBODY (well... almost) reads this.-- Tdxiang 02:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Let us make this neutral:

Mormonism is a term used to describe religious, ideological, and cultural aspects of the various Latter Day Saint churches. The term Mormonism comes from the Book of Mormon a sacred text Joseph Smith, Jr. said he translated from golden plates in 1829. In 1830 Smith founded the Church of Christ, and the faithful were known amongst themselves as Latter Day Saints. Outside the church they were called Mormons. After his death, the majority of Smith's followers were led by Brigham Young to the Salt Lake Valley in the current state of Utah.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is the body that was led by Young, has grown to be a worldwide organization, which makes the term Mormonism reflect the beliefs and practices of this group more so than smaller denominations who still adhere to a belief in the sacred nature of the Book of Mormon. However, other demographic groups embrace or accept the term Mormonism, including the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, other Mormon fundamentalist organizations, Reform Mormonism, and cultural Mormons.

Adherents view Mormonism as a form of Christianity, although not part of the traditional Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant traditions. Because of differences in points of doctrine and practice, however, some traditional Christians disagree. See Mormonism and Christianity. The faith has been described at various times and in various contexts as "a sect, a mystery cult, a new religion, a church, a people, a nation, or an American subculture" (Ahlstrom 1972, p. 508).

Most adherents of Mormonism may be respectfully called Latter Day Saints (or the hyphenated Latter-day Saints in reference to the largest denomination).[source?] Other generally acceptable terms include LDS, Saints, and Mormons. A minority of adherents object to the terms Mormon and Mormonism, since these are terms coined by outsiders to label members of the Church. This is from EN. View it.-- Tdxiang 02:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I made the article far less negative[change source]

I changed the parts that I think you guys would think of as negative. I'm sorry if I offended anyone.--Sir James Paul 02:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

  • No worries, you fixed it!-- Tdxiang 02:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone think it is sill negative? If so please tell me and I will fix it. Thanks and god bless.--Sir James Paul 21:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Different movements[change source]

Hello again, it seems that after Joseph Smith died, there was a conflict on who would succeed him. It looks like Brigham Young did finally succeed him. What resulted from this is a variety of groups, which centered on the questionJoe Spmith a prophet (yes/no/perhaps), BY a prophet, plural marriage (yes/no/perhaps), etc. Would it be possible to point out the bigger divisions in here, and their respective groups? -- Eptalon 22:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC) I deleted this part because it did not use simple english. "Different Groups beliefs Some people who call themselves Mormons are not part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. These people have made other Mormon churches. Some of their beliefs are different.

When Brigham Young became the second president of the church after Joseph Smith was killed, some people did not think he was the rightful president. When Brigham Young lead most of the Mormons to Utah, these people stayed in Illinois. They believed that Joseph Smith's son should be the next president. Today, this church is called the Community of Christ. It is the second largest church to call themselves Mormons. They have more than 250,000 people in their church.

Other splits in the church happened later. The official Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says that a man should only marry one woman. This is called monogamy. In the beginning of the church, this was different. A man could be married to more than one woman at the same time (called polygamy). When the church changed its position, some people left the official church (and continued with polygamy). These groups are very small compared to the official church."--Sir James Paul 00:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Possible improvements[change source]

  • Link to Restoration movement/Restorationism; and explain it
  • Mention the perhaps 4-5 biggest movements in Mormonism (and how they are different from each other)
  • References?
  • Other websites?
  • Perhaps give a more scholarly view? - What do those think that studied sciences of religion/Christianity?
  • How does mormonism fit in with the other Christian movements (such as Anglicanism, for example?)

These are of course just ideas.--Eptalon (talk) 07:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Disputes and merges[change source]

The article looks like it's for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints branch of mormonism than the movement as a whole. I think in order for it to be completely accurate (and possibly neutural) we should split the Utah based section to the LDS Church article and go deeper into the other denominations to have a more balanced article. It should also talk about the Succession Crisis as well to explain why there are more than one Mormon church. --wL <talk · changes> 05:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello there, first of all, I am not a mormon, so i cannot really judge. Here are some things to consider:
  • Do normal people look for this religious movement under Mormons, or LDS?
  • They look at the "mormon church" as the LDS, but the movement itself deals with all its denominations.
  • Is it important to make that difference? - Is it important enough to have separate articles on the main groups of followers in Utah, in Missouri, and elsewhere? - If so, should it be explained what the differences between the Utah and the Missouri branch is, in detail (The disagreement over following also split Islam into Shia and Sunni, eg; which lead to a different interpretation of priesthood)
  • It is. Without it, we'll have a POV where the LDS Church as it stands represents the LDS movement, when only those who followed Brigham Young have
  • I misspelled the article, but the article is already there.
  • Can we find an arrangement where we explain the comomn beliefs in one article, where we also point to the main groups, so that in the article about one particular group, we only need to explain in what way their belief is different from mainstream?
  • This article is supposed to both describe that as well as reasons why the church split after Smith's death, and summaries of each denomination. ---wL <talk · changes>
These are of course just thoughs. Anyone is welcome to comment. --Eptalon (talk) 09:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I have also written an article about the Community of Christ (second largest "group" after LDS); If you look at them they seem to be much less dogmatic (to the point of almost being like a Protstant Christian Church) - After this finding I generally think our Mormonism related coverage needs to be reviewed:
  • What beliefs are shared by all Mormons (explain here); which of them are LDS, Community,... (explain on the resp. page)
  • Can we get rid of the Controversy flag?
As stated I am not the one to do this, I know too little. --Eptalon (talk) 16:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Per en, I think we should keep them separate, with Mormonism dealing with the movement, and Church of JC of LDS dealing with the main branch. If I'm wrong then please tell me, as this is just info I gained from a quick check of en. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:21, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree keeping them separate, but Mormonism page needs some clean up and work. --Samoojas (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC) Looks actually pretty good. --Samoojas (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Introduction[change source]

"Catholic or Protestant groups - the two main types of Christians" This is a general statement, that is not sourced. What about, for example, the Orthodox groups, who are neither Catholic nor Protestant and number 250 million followers? This statement adds nothing to the explanation of mormonism. Pob1984 (talk) 13:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, the "most important" denominations of Christianity can be subsummed as Catholic, Protestant or (Eastern) Orthodox, however:
  • What about the Oriental Orthodox (and other Churches that split before Chalcedon); some of these are the main Christian groups, eg. in Iraq, or in India?
  • The Catholics are only the Roman Catholics, or also the "Old Catholics" (who split in the 1800s over questions of infallibility of the pope)
  • Anglicans anyone (they are not really Protestant, more like Catholics who do not recognise the Pope)?
  • There is a very wide spectrum of Protestants (so called Free-churches on one side, and ultra-conservatives on the other); most of the US can probably be called protestant in some form.
So I think you should be bold and change content so it fits the article better... --Eptalon (talk) 13:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and think it is too problematic for the introduction of an SE article - so I took it out. I tried to simplify it, added a reference where needed, and took out the unreferenced detail on how Mormonism and 'mainstream' Christianity differ. Perhaps someone could create a separate, referenced, subheading on this? Pob1984 (talk) 14:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge revisited[change source]

It has been suggested to merge this into the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However:

  • There are about 70 Mormon movements
  • Rocky-Mountain-Mormons" (Young is a legitimate Prophet); biggest of these is the LDS (who abolished polygamy in 1890)
  • Young is not a legit prophet: Biggest of these is the Community of Christ (no polygamy, lead by a gremium of 12)
  • No baptizing the dead, no "hidden rituals": "Church of Christ with the Elijah Message" is the biggest of these.

If we decide to not merge, this would mean that the "bulk" of the common beliefs and history should be in this article. I do however not know the numbers; if LDS is 95% of the whole thing, its probably not worth keeping a separate article. --Eptalon (talk) 21:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with the notion that a 5% minority would not warrant a separate article. In the United States, fundamentalist sects such as the FLDS that broke off get a large amount of media attention, especially after Jon Krakauer wrote a bestselling book about them and after the Warren Jeffs and Elizabeth Smart news stories. Kansan (talk) 22:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
What Kansan said. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
IIRC, movements like the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints have (had?) a few hundred members. Even if a large media attention over a few weeks may warrant an article, such phenomena are transitory. How many people today would be able to gice details about the en:Waco Siege, which happened in 1993? - Same thing, en:Order of the Solar Temple, 1997? - try to ask people about the "religious backgrounds" of such movements? (Note that neither the Solar Temple, nor the people at the base of the Waco siege had a Mormon background)
At the moment, I think not merging could give the better result, because all the "common" beliefs could be explained here. On the other hand, I don't know how difficult it is for a LDS (or other Mormon-group) member to admit that there are several other groups who share the bulk of their beliefs.--Eptalon (talk) 11:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
My argument here is not so much that there is one transistory media event but that there have been a number (in addition to a popular television show "Big Love"). Also, the Warren Jeffs legal story has not gone away over the last few years. The FLDS has become well known, and many people do not know that they are separate from the "mainstream" LDS. In addition to all of the combined notability, I believe dispelling these notions are important. Kansan (talk) 16:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Would your argument therefore be in favor of merging "Mormonism" into the LDS article, or against it? - Note that at SEWP, we do not currently make the distinction between "Mormon", and "Latter-day Saint" (or "Latter Day Saint"). Another option would be to move the "Mormonism" article to "Latter (-) Day Saint movement" (or similar). --Eptalon (talk) 16:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

King James Bible[change source]

User:Gotanda has removed all reference to the King James Bible from this article.[2] I think that is a mistake. Could someone please include a discussion of the status of the King James Bible within Mormonism. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 13:26, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I have not seen a response. Does anyone object to restoring the three sentences about the King James Bible? Racepacket (talk) 10:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
I think that the removed passage has several issues:
  • Some of the references are old (1976)
  • "While Mormons believe in the general accuracy of the modern day text of the Bible, they also believe that it is incomplete and contains errors." - The sentence before that talked about something being canonical/a reference - For the sake of clarity, we should not keep both sentences. The next sentence then talks about the Book of Mormon, which supposedly corrects these errors.
So if you bring back the passage, please update the references, to be published preferably after 2001.--Eptalon (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2011 (UTC)