Talk:Polygamy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>David Finn m (→Joseph Smith: final reply to Mary) |
imported>Sandy Harris |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:You are saying that if a man claims that he had a divine revelation, that because he really believes it we may not say he merely "claims" it, we have to just say a revelation occurred. What about people who really believe in moon-cheese or fairies, do we have to treat their words in a similar fashion? If they ''really'' believe in Martians wouldn't it be unfair of us to require that they provide some evidence for their claims? | :You are saying that if a man claims that he had a divine revelation, that because he really believes it we may not say he merely "claims" it, we have to just say a revelation occurred. What about people who really believe in moon-cheese or fairies, do we have to treat their words in a similar fashion? If they ''really'' believe in Martians wouldn't it be unfair of us to require that they provide some evidence for their claims? | ||
:The changes I made to | :The changes I made to this article stood for six months until you noticed them. Your reasons for reversion seem ill-considered, and (once again) I do not believe that you have read the policy on reverting before doing so. At this point I am going to undo your reversion and pass the matter on to the relevant CZ officials to consider, because I believe that no amount of discussion will enhance your understanding of this matter. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 01:49, 12 May 2011 (CDT) | ||
:: As I see it, David is obviously right on this one. Quite a few people have claimed divine revelations, from Allah dictating the Koran to Mohammed or [[Joan of Arc]]'s revelations through to [http://taipingrebellion.com/ Hong Xiuquan] finding out he was God's other son, Jesus' kid brother. "Mormons believe that ..." or "the Mormon scriptures say that ...", "Smith believed that ..." or "Smith claimed that ..." are all fine. "Smith had a divine revelation that ..." is not. For consistency, we should treat all these claims in a similar way. Since they contradict each other, a policy of taking them all as given leads inevitably to the conclusion that the Lord is schizophrenic. Better to label them all as claims. [[User:Sandy Harris|Sandy Harris]] 02:21, 12 May 2011 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 01:21, 12 May 2011
Question
Where do group marriages or other many-to-many setups fit in? Are there any societies that actually do it that way? Most other possibilities have been tried, not sure about that one. Sandy Harris 06:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Joseph Smith
Aleta had the statement correct. If Joseph Smith believed he received those revelations that's what we state. Editorializing does not make an encyclopedia. Reverted article back to Aleta's edits. Mary Ash 00:58, 12 May 2011 (CDT)
- You are saying that if a man claims that he had a divine revelation, that because he really believes it we may not say he merely "claims" it, we have to just say a revelation occurred. What about people who really believe in moon-cheese or fairies, do we have to treat their words in a similar fashion? If they really believe in Martians wouldn't it be unfair of us to require that they provide some evidence for their claims?
- The changes I made to this article stood for six months until you noticed them. Your reasons for reversion seem ill-considered, and (once again) I do not believe that you have read the policy on reverting before doing so. At this point I am going to undo your reversion and pass the matter on to the relevant CZ officials to consider, because I believe that no amount of discussion will enhance your understanding of this matter. David Finn 01:49, 12 May 2011 (CDT)
- As I see it, David is obviously right on this one. Quite a few people have claimed divine revelations, from Allah dictating the Koran to Mohammed or Joan of Arc's revelations through to Hong Xiuquan finding out he was God's other son, Jesus' kid brother. "Mormons believe that ..." or "the Mormon scriptures say that ...", "Smith believed that ..." or "Smith claimed that ..." are all fine. "Smith had a divine revelation that ..." is not. For consistency, we should treat all these claims in a similar way. Since they contradict each other, a policy of taking them all as given leads inevitably to the conclusion that the Lord is schizophrenic. Better to label them all as claims. Sandy Harris 02:21, 12 May 2011 (CDT)