Jump to content

Talk:Adam-ondi-Ahman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

« 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)[reply]

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

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adam-ondi-Ahman. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading citation

[edit]

The sentence "The name was first referenced in about 1832, in a revelation to Joseph Smith..." is supported by citing Revelation, 1 March 1832 [D&C 78], Page 1. When I checked the document, I did not see the name "Adam-ondi-Ahman" anywhere, so I have removed the citation. Lusanaherandraton (talk) 20:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting, because in the modern versions of D&C 78 published by the LDS Church (and in the corresponding D&C 77 published by the Community of Christ), Adam-ondi-Ahman is referenced. Smith often edited his revelations afterwards and sometimes made additions, so this might be one of those instances. There's probably a source that we can find somewhere that describes when the reference to AOA was included. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:04, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, and the reference to AOA is included in that printing of the revelation: [1]. So the reference must have been inserted sometime between March 1832 when that copy of it was made and the formal printing in 1835. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:11, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Adam-ondi-Ahman. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:20, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adam-ondi-Ahman&oldid=1204508738"