Discussão:Scripture index - Histórico de revisões

Nathan000000: /* Main idea */

2006-04-18T00:39:55Z

Main idea

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 00h39min de 18 de abril de 2006
Linha 6:		Linha 6:
	I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. It will probably include only those criticisms of the type "The Book of Mormon can't be true because it says here . . ." or "LDS doctrine contradicts this Bible passage . . ." or "Joseph Smith's prophecy in D&C X:Y-Z failed because . . ." Mountain Meadows articles probably wouldn't be indexed here at all. And not all articles about polygamy would be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?		I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. It will probably include only those criticisms of the type "The Book of Mormon can't be true because it says here . . ." or "LDS doctrine contradicts this Bible passage . . ." or "Joseph Smith's prophecy in D&C X:Y-Z failed because . . ." Mountain Meadows articles probably wouldn't be indexed here at all. And not all articles about polygamy would be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?

	I mention that because the two passages currently under "Adam-God" are in ''support'' of the LDS position, so they wouldn't be passages that a person looking for answers would know to look under. I'm imagining this index consisting pretty much of the passages used ''against'' the Church, since those will be the ones the user has on his mind.		I mention that because the two passages currently under "Adam-God" are in ''support'' of the LDS position, so they wouldn't be passages that a person looking for answers would know to look under. I'm imagining this index consisting pretty much of the passages used ''against'' the Church, since those will be the ones the user has on his mind. That would also keep this index a little smaller and more manageable.

Nathan000000: /* Main idea */

2006-04-18T00:39:08Z

Main idea

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 00h39min de 18 de abril de 2006
Linha 4:		Linha 4:
	I think it'd be good to have a page where people can look up resources, not by topic, but by the verse or verses in question. For example, a user hears the Rev. 22 argument against continuing revelation. Instead of trying to decide what heading to look under in the topical guide (prophets, canon, revelation, Bible, etc.), they just come to the scripture index and look under Rev. 22.		I think it'd be good to have a page where people can look up resources, not by topic, but by the verse or verses in question. For example, a user hears the Rev. 22 argument against continuing revelation. Instead of trying to decide what heading to look under in the topical guide (prophets, canon, revelation, Bible, etc.), they just come to the scripture index and look under Rev. 22.

	I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. ~~For example,~~ Mountain Meadows articles probably wouldn't be indexed here at all. And articles about ~~Joseph Smith's practice of~~ polygamy ~~wouldn't~~ be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?		I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. It will probably include only those criticisms of the type "The Book of Mormon can't be true because it says here . . ." or "LDS doctrine contradicts this Bible passage . . ." or "Joseph Smith's prophecy in D&C X:Y-Z failed because . . ." Mountain Meadows articles probably wouldn't be indexed here at all. And not all articles about polygamy would be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?

	~~Also~~, ~~should it~~ be a ~~table? Should an entry consist~~ of ~~just~~ the ~~passage and~~ the ~~related links? Or should an entry also include a brief summary of~~ the ~~argument it's being used to support, in case there are any passages that are used to make more than one point?~~		I mention that because the two passages currently under "Adam-God" are in ''support'' of the LDS position, so they wouldn't be passages that a person looking for answers would know to look under. I'm imagining this index consisting pretty much of the passages used ''against'' the Church, since those will be the ones the user has on his mind.

Nathan000000: /* Main idea */

2006-04-18T00:06:43Z

Main idea

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 00h06min de 18 de abril de 2006
Linha 4:		Linha 4:
	I think it'd be good to have a page where people can look up resources, not by topic, but by the verse or verses in question. For example, a user hears the Rev. 22 argument against continuing revelation. Instead of trying to decide what heading to look under in the topical guide (prophets, canon, revelation, Bible, etc.), they just come to the scripture index and look under Rev. 22.		I think it'd be good to have a page where people can look up resources, not by topic, but by the verse or verses in question. For example, a user hears the Rev. 22 argument against continuing revelation. Instead of trying to decide what heading to look under in the topical guide (prophets, canon, revelation, Bible, etc.), they just come to the scripture index and look under Rev. 22.

	I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. For example, articles about Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy wouldn't be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?		I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. For example, Mountain Meadows articles probably wouldn't be indexed here at all. And articles about Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy wouldn't be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?

	Also, should it be a table? Should an entry consist of the passage and the related links? Or should an entry include a brief summary of the argument it's being used to support, in case there are any passages that are used to make more than one point?		Also, should it be a table? Should an entry consist of just the passage and the related links? Or should an entry also include a brief summary of the argument it's being used to support, in case there are any passages that are used to make more than one point?

Nathan000000: Main idea

2006-04-18T00:05:15Z

Main idea

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 00h05min de 18 de abril de 2006
Linha 1:		Linha 1:
	This page was started at [[NathanRichardson\|Nathan Richardson's]] suggestion. There is no way to automate this index, so any time a new article is created, the author will need to add all its scripture references here. --[[User:MikeParker\|MikeParker]] 18:01, 17 Apr 2006 (EDT)		This page was started at [[NathanRichardson\|Nathan Richardson's]] suggestion. There is no way to automate this index, so any time a new article is created, the author will need to add all its scripture references here. --[[User:MikeParker\|MikeParker]] 18:01, 17 Apr 2006 (EDT)

			==Main idea==
			I think it'd be good to have a page where people can look up resources, not by topic, but by the verse or verses in question. For example, a user hears the Rev. 22 argument against continuing revelation. Instead of trying to decide what heading to look under in the topical guide (prophets, canon, revelation, Bible, etc.), they just come to the scripture index and look under Rev. 22.

			I think we should probably limit it to criticisms directly related to the verse itself, and exclude criticisms only tangentially related to a passage. In other words, many articles and topics will not be within the scope of this index. For example, articles about Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy wouldn't be indexed under "D&C 132." Rather, the only polygamy articles (that I can think of) that would merit an entry in the scripture index would be those that address verses like Jacob 2:24 and its apparent contradiction of D&C 132:38–39. Does that makes sense?

			Also, should it be a table? Should an entry consist of the passage and the related links? Or should an entry include a brief summary of the argument it's being used to support, in case there are any passages that are used to make more than one point?

MikeParker em 22h01min de 17 de abril de 2006

2006-04-17T22:01:47Z

Página nova

This page was started at [[NathanRichardson|Nathan Richardson's]] suggestion. There is no way to automate this index, so any time a new article is created, the author will need to add all its scripture references here. --[[User:MikeParker|MikeParker]] 18:01, 17 Apr 2006 (EDT)