You know, this Arius thing seems like another of those no win situations and
to give it more than a passing concern is likely of minor value. You should
state your opinion (with references) and move on. However, it is result of
combining human nature with the design of wikipedia that keeps that
The United States has lasted almost 231 years and it seems to be doing
fine. Why not wikipedia?
Because we've abandoned our Constitution in all sorts of ways.
On 4/5/07, Justin Findlay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On AD 2007 April 05 Thursday 07:05:13 AM -0600, Steven H. McCown wrote:
Can we
On AD 2007 April 05 Thursday 08:51:27 AM -0600, John Harrison wrote:
The United States has lasted almost 231 years and it seems to be doing
fine. Why not wikipedia?
Because we've abandoned our Constitution in all sorts of ways.
It was meant to be a double question. Since you've taken one
It looks to me like the comparison between the teachings of our church
and the teachings of Arius is rather easy to make and they rather
explicitly made it. We differ in some rather significant respects, but
that doesn't negate the reality that there are similarities.
Nevertheless it didn't
the poster of that section has removed the list of religions
I think that is much more NPOV and leaves it up to the reader to decide who
that is.
This hurts to read. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and aspires to
present all human knowledge. Less is not more at Wikipedia, and the
Wikipedia
On 4/5/07, Thomas Haws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am sorry to hear (unless it was solely original research and
unattributable) that the problem has been solved by deletion.
Most of what was there before was original research that I could tell
- there were very few citations to backup the
Anti-mormon or not, it was disinformation about us and very POV
(point-of-view).
I wouldn't call it disinformation or biased (which is what I assume you mean by
POV, though technically NPOV is a POV). At least as far as the Mormon section
went, it all looked like a good description of the
I have been staying out of this wikipedia becoming anti-mormon thread until I
understood the issue better.
I, like Sean, believe that the original version hit it pretty much on the head.
It sounds like what WE as Mormons believe in!
If this is a mistake in may part I suggest that someone point
On 4/5/07, Sean M. Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*[[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
Perhaps one could've argued that a slight rewording was necessary for
clarity. (Perhaps comparable rather than in-line.) I can't imagine
why this is cause to imagine that this segment of the article was part
of the anti-mormon propaganda machine. I think that despite the partial
citation you
As far as the Nicene Creed goes, and flexibility of interpretation, its
interpretation is certainly flexible enough to put our church in gross
violation. This is especially true from the POV of numerous traditional
Christians and it is explicitly not a violation of the NPOV to mention
that fact.
On 4/5/07, Sean M. Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps one could've argued that a slight rewording was necessary for
clarity. (Perhaps comparable rather than in-line.) I can't imagine
why this is cause to imagine that this segment of the article was part
of the anti-mormon propaganda machine. I
12 matches
Mail list logo
