Talk:Adam-ondi-Ahman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Missouri (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

Hi, I'm curious about the accuracy of the part where Mormons gut Gallatin. CITATIONS PLZ :) --- User:Cookiecaper

Yes, this part is correct. See BYU professor Alex Baugh's book A Call to Arms -- Chapter 7: The Mormon Defense of Daviess County, Oct. 1838. "At the time the [Mormon] Caldwell troops arrived in Daviess County, [non-Mormon] mob forces had already commenced pillaging and burning isolated Latter-day Saint homes" (p. 85). "On Oct. 18, Mormon Companies made up of men from Caldwell and Daviess Counties, and comprised of both regular militia as well as members of the Danite society, visited the three [non-Mormon] settlements": Gallatin, Millport and Grindstone Forks (p. 86). "Gallatin was nearly completely gutted. The only structure reported to have been left unscathed was a small shoemaker's shop... The effects of the Mormon destruction at Gallatin could be seen for several miles" (p. 87). Millport and Grindstone Forks were similarly sacked (p. 87). The result of these raids was to drive the non-Mormons from the county. Mormons took the looted property back to Adam-ondi-Ahman: "Some Latter-day Saints where critical of what they considered wanton pillaging on the part of Mormon forces" (p. 91). Please note that this is a pro-Mormon history reference source, written by a believing church member and published by the Mormon church's university, BYU. See also this map: http://www.mormonatlas.com/images/daviess.gif. --- 69.241.234.243

References[edit]

ISBNs, anybody? User:Zoe|(talk) 00:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Needless complication of what the D&C is[edit]

I see no reason to change Adam-ondi-Ahman is the subject of a revelation recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants, a book of scripture in some churches of the Latter Day Saint movement to Adam-ondi-Ahman is the subject of a revelation recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants, a book of scripture accepted as cannon by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Community of Christ and in a number of other churches of the Latter Day Saint movement. It's needlessly more wordy and gives the article undue centrism to the major Latter Day Saint churches. The opening sentence of Doctrine and Covenants says The Doctrine and Covenants (sometimes abbreviated and cited as D&C) is a part of the open scriptural canon of several denominations of the Latter Day Saint movement. This seems like the simplest and least POV way of descriving what the D&C is—no reason to change it here either. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I think the recent changes are helpful in this regard. They've made it clear that the section in question is in the LDS edition, which is significant, since the section is not in the Community of Christ version. Most Latter Day Saint churches use either an LDS Church-based edition or a CofC-based edition, so some churches have the section, while others do not. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

« Efforts halted »[edit]

Would someone please give an explanation of the phrase « Efforts halted » in big, bold letters in the Infobox?

Also, in response to the reply by User:Good Olfactory immediately above, where he states « ... so some churches have the section, while others do not », please describe the issues surrounding the omitting « the section » about Adam-ondi-Ahman by some churches (either in a reply or in the article). If this an issue of the text being rejected as non-canonical by various Latter-day Saint sects, a paragraph or two about this would be a valuable additon. --- Are images of the manuscripts about Adam-ondi-Ahman in Mr. Smith's hand online? (If not, why not?) Regards, Charvex (talk) 08:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the info that defines the term « Efforts halted ». It helps understanding. Charvex (talk) 10:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)