Template talk:Christianity

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

First Topic

Great work, Hoji! --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:23, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

Mormonism on Template

Rob, I noticed you removed Mormonism from this template after Conservative's recommendation. The name of the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We are Christians as we worship and believe in Jesus Christ as our Savior. We also believe the Bible is the word of God. Here are a few references for you to read if you are in doubt. Jesus Christ, “Mom, Are We Christians?”, “The Peaceable Followers of Christ” and Building Bridges of Understanding. If you are going to insist on removing my Christian faith from Christianity on this site, then send me a private email. Crocoite Talk 02:44, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
  • This is really starting to get nutty here. If user Conservative is going to have this kind of pull, I am going to have to insist he and RobS) "decloak" himself, and step forward, and present his educational and theological credentials. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 03:29, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
Conservative is correct (as far as I know) in that most of Christendom doesn't include Mormonism in Christianity (the reason being that Mormons don't believe that Jesus is God). The problem is that Mormons do count themselves as part of Christendom, so who's definition do we accept? Frankly, apart from declaring that Conservapedia believes that Jesus is God and therefore taking the stance that Mormonism is not Christian, I don't know the answer to that little conundrum. Philip J. Rayment 06:03, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
Well, they do believe He is G-d, but not by the terms laid down in the Nicene Creed which is the statement of faith that pretty much every other Christian denomination adheres to. Agreed, it is a conundrum :/ File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 06:52, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
  • I don't think so at all. As Billy Graham said on the subject of exclusion; "It only becomes a problem when good and honest men stop focusing on all that we agree upon, and start searching for those divisive things we do not....surely that isn't what God wants." So why go looking for things to cast others out for? What is their purpose of heart in so doing? --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 07:02, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
And therein lies the conundrum - and at what point does a doctrine or a sect or cult cease to be what we would rightly call Christian, and move into a different "pigeonhole"? After all, we could take Dr. Graham's words to mean that Islam should also be classed as a branch of Christianity - they claim the same G-d, the same roots, but deny the Trinity - much as do the CoJCLDS File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 07:23, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
I think one of the fundamental differences there is that Muslims don't consider themselves Christians. Mormons do.--Steve 13:49, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
It isn't whether Muslims, or Mormons, or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster for that matter, consider themself Christian, its whether the majority consensus of Christians' is that said faiths are, in fact, Christian. By virtue of their acceptance of the Nicene Creed that suggests they do not. File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 13:55, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
The Nicene Creed isn't in the Bible either. Any strict Bible constructionist should have a problem with the assertion that the Nicene Creed is the Word of God. Crocoite Talk 14:03, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
The word Christianity isn't in the Bible either. File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 14:04, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
The word Christian is, though.--Steve 14:10, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
Why? You can find a bunch of Christians that don't consider Catholica Christian either. That doesn't mean that they aren't. I'm not saying that some Mormon beliefs don't differ from a lot of other Christian denominations, because they do. But most of their beliefs are within mainstream Christianity, and Mormons have identified themselves as Christian since the beginning of Mormonism. In my experience, a lot of the people who say Mormonism isn't Christianity do it to be exclusionist or to slur Mormonism.--Steve 14:08, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
A swift review of my comments above would show that I haven't "voted" either way for the inclusion of the CoJCLDS... I called it a "conundrum", as they do not believe in the Holy Trinity, yet believe in part that Jesus Christ was "of" G-d. And for the record, what is wrong with exclusionism? Would you say that the Children of God cult is Christian? Biblically-based theology, some... "unorthodox" beliefs... So should we call them Christian? File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 14:20, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Someone reverted RobS's edit to put back in Mormonism, but they also put back in Lutheranism. Isn't Lutheranism a part of Protestantism as Conservative says?bd Talk 18:28, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
Sorry to weigh in late. I just found out about this discussion page. The United Methodist Church has stated that the Mormon faith has "some radically differing doctrine on such matters of belief as the nature and being of God; the nature, origin, and purpose of Jesus Christ; and the nature and way of salvation."[1] The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod goes further, stating that it, "together with the vast majority of Christian denominations in the United States, does not regard the Mormon church as a Christian church."[2], while the Southern Baptist Convention states that the Mormon religion is "not consistent with biblicalChristianity."[3] Beliefnet.com details a number of differences between the Mormon faith and traditional Christianity.[4] Given the above comments above from Protestant denominations and given a lack of statements from the other side in regards to branches of Christianity saying Mormonism is part of Christianity on this website so far, I think the choice is obvious in regards to whether Mormonism should be included on the Christianity template. Mormonism should not be on the Christianity template. Conservative 15:47, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Fellow Conservapedians , I ask you to read the following article from an evangelical Christian 'We Have Sinned Against You'. A leading evangelical speaks at the Mormon Tabernacle and says evangelicals have spread lies about LDS beliefs. Here is an excerpt:
Fuller Theological Seminary president and Beliefnet columnist Richard J. Mouw apologized to Mormons for evangelicals' tendency to distort the truth about Latter-day Saints' beliefs. "Let me state it clearly. We evangelicals have sinned against you," Mouw said. The speech is making the rounds among surprised and generally pleased evangelical and Mormon groups.
I know that I have learned much in this continuing dialogue, and I am now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in things we have said about you.
I am offended by Conservatives repeated edits concerted atttempts to remove Mormonism from the Christianity template. I am anxious to have Andy's and the Conservapedia panel's decision on this matter. Crocoite Talk 16:35, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Crocoite, although you may be able to read into the talk which you've quoted from an inference that the speaker (Richard J. Mouw) considers Mormonism part of Christianity, there is nothing specific there about Mormonism being part of Christianity. It is quite possible for a Christian to admit, hypothetically, that Christians have misrepresented Hinduism, without that meaning that they consider Hinduism as being Christian, so this speech, as it stands, says little about the specific issue in question here.
Is there a way that Mormonism can be included on the template, but in a separate section that indicates that they are not normally considered part of Christianity, but also in a way that is not offensive to Mormons? A section headed "sects" would obviously not be acceptable, but is there some term that would be acceptable to both sides? Philip J. Rayment 18:55, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Do Mormons still accept Christ as their lord & savior?-Phoenix 16:39, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Yes, we do. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. I believe Christ is my Lord and Savior. Crocoite Talk 16:46, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
And that Jesus Christ is the "...God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made,

being of one substance with the Father"? File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 16:55, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Crocite, please do not misrepresent my actions. I deleted Mormonism from the Christianity template exactly one time. Conservative 16:47, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Conservative, Let me clarify my previous statement concerning your edits. The first time, you asked someone else to remove Mormonism from the Christianity template.
There are two problems with the Christianity template which can be found at Trinity. One is that it includes Mormonism in Western Christianity and most western Christians do not consider Mormonism to be Christian. The second problem is that it list Protestantism and then list Lutheranism. Well Lutheranism is part of Protestantism so it is duplication. I would fix it myself but I don't know how to edit templates. Conservative 19:37, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
RobS obliged. [per User:Conservatives suggestion)]. The second time, you did it your self. [5]. Regardless, you achieved your desire... unless I choose to have an edit war with you, and I will NOT. I choose to discuss this in an open forum. Crocoite Talk 17:02, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Nonetheless, I editted it once and RobS agrees with me on this matter. Conservative 17:05, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Please see my "christian template" compromise position which is below. Conservative 18:48, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Definition of a Christian denomination

Matthew 18:20: "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Sounds like a good working definition to me. The Mormons would seem to qualify (as would Baptists, Moonies, Catholics, Seventh-Day Adventists, Lutherans, Christian Scientists, and Episcopalians...) Dpbsmith 19:10, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

First, I think what you mean is a definitions of "Christian", not "Christian denomination".
Second, I'm not sure that you (or perhaps even I) fully understand that phrase "in my name".
Third, I think issue could be taken with a couple of others in that list.
Philip J. Rayment 06:50, 9 June 2007 (EDT)
  • I am almost 100% certain Jesus would object to anyone taking issue. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 06:58, 9 June 2007 (EDT)
And I'm almost 100% certain that He would not. Philip J. Rayment 07:45, 9 June 2007 (EDT)

Template

This template is cut and pasted from WP -- I vehmently object on those grounds. The whole template should be scrapped, and CP editors create our own from our own discussion amongst ourselves, and we should not allow this effort by WP ops to dictate and regulate our content. RobS 15:04, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Christianity

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Christianity&action=history

  • Well stuff copied from WP, better get ready to scrap lots then! And I will still insist on Mormons being there, regardless. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 17:50, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
Take note that the template here differs significantly from WP's. The source code is identical, but the links, colors, and image are all much different. This isn't the same as copying an article from WP. And I support Mormonism being on there as well. --Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğtalk 17:57, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
The content is not being regulated or dictated by "WP ops" (so this issue has no bearing on whether Mormonism is in the template, if anyone's thinking that). This template has no parser functions, it is merely a table structure with colours, links, and an image. If the colours, links, and image differ from Wikipedia's, you can hardly argue that "[t]he source code is identical". Philip J. Rayment 18:26, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

Christianity template - compromise position

I think there is a way to keep the Mormons and Christians who disagree that Mormonism is part of Christianity happy in regards to the "Christianity template issue". I think the solution is too not to have a Christianity template. If there is no template there is nothing to argue about. Who agrees with me that we should forego having a Christianity template? This way here I could create Christianity related articles with no problems to my conscience and not be concerned that a "Christianity template" which I believe is in error would be slapped on the articles I created (I don't want to be an unwilling recruiter of Mormonism vis a vis a template I disagree with). I could also recruit more of my fellow evangelicals or conservatives to create Christianity articles. So far I have recruited 6 people to sign up to Conservapedia and I wish to continue to do this. Lastly, I would like Andy to endorse my compromise and since Andy wants to keep disputes to a minimum and focus our efforts on creating more content I think he should endorse my compromise. Conservative 18:48, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

I don't see this as a good solution. Navigation boxes (which is what this template is) are quite useful aids to getting around Wikis, so eliminating it is not a good idea. I did just suggest a compromise above, but without a specific proposal, so it may not work. Another solution may be to replace this navigation box with a different one that does not specifically identify itself as "Christian", but again, I don't have a specific proposal to make in that regard. Philip J. Rayment 19:02, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I've just thought of a possibility. If the heading on the navigation box was changed to something like "Christianity and related religions", it might be acceptable, because people who don't believe that Mormonism is part of Christianity (like me) can accept Mormonism being on such a list, and Mormons can (I hope) accept it because it wouldn't specifically identify Mormonism as not being Christian. Philip J. Rayment 19:05, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Unfortunately, I've found that people often hone in on a specific suggestion and ignore the main point being made, so I'll make other specific suggestions here. So if you like my idea, the heading could be replaced with any one of the following (or another than I haven't thought of):
  • Christianity and related religions
  • Christianity and similar religions
  • Christianity and related groups
  • Christianity and similar groups
I'm sure others could suggest further ideas.
Philip J. Rayment 19:08, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I agree with Conservative that the solution is to remove the Christianity template. Instead of adopting a Wikipedia style template and trying to make it Neutral (like Wikipedia does), I favor removing the template altogether. Crocoite Talk 19:14, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Phillip Rayment, I believe you to be a cordial man who acts in good faith. However, I think such a plan would still force some people to be unwilling evangelists of Mormonism because they created a Christianity article. I also believe some people would assert that Mormonism is not related to Christianity. In short, I agree with Crocite. Conservative 19:23, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Unless and until Andy decides, the template will remain as it has been. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:18, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
You mean that trying to come to agreement among ourselves is not an option? Even if Andy decides to not get involved? And isn't there already agreement that Lutherism should come out? Philip J. Rayment 21:25, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
  • If we can come to some agreement, that would be fine, Philip. By agreement, I assume you mean one arrived at by more than two or three of "us"? Because what I see here, "us" agreeing while I was offline. The Lutherans are no long Christians? :O --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:34, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Agreement would be either by all involved in discussing this (even if that's only a handful), or by a significant majority of those involved in discussing this.
The suggestions to remove both Lutheranism and Mormonism were for two entirely different reasons. Mormonism on the grounds that it is not part of Christianity, and Lutheranism on the grounds that it is already covered by Protestantism. (I actually suspect that it may be possible to argue that Lutheranism is not part of Protestantism, but nobody has made that argument, so I'm assuming that nobody is disagreeing that Lutheranism is part of Protestantism.)
Philip J. Rayment 21:47, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Well I can agree it can be covered under Protestantism. I think perhaps a better compromise for the CJCLDS (LDS/Mormons), that would not reward arbitrary actions on the part of some, would be to include a category in the template, "Other Churches Who Accept Jesus Christ" perhaps. Backing Andy, and Conservapedia into a corner, on anyone's part, into excluding whole classes is to be avoided. Those who want to make this encyclopedia exclusionary to whole groups of Christians, those who accept Jesus Christ, is counterproductive and contrary to the Student Panel's wishes. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 22:04, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
That's along the lines of my first compromise suggestion above, and I would be interested in Crocoite's opinion of it. What do you think of my other suggestion, of changing the title of the template? Philip J. Rayment 22:29, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Honestly, I feel Protestantism is large enough to have it's OWN template. After all, there are so many sects of Christianity already. I don't think removing the template is the solution. I think that while Conservative is against adding it, I feel that first and foremost, Christianity is about belief in Jesus above all else. That is the key foundation. After all, Christianity is the religion of Christ. Therefore, since Mormons do believe in Christ, I feel they do deserve inclusion in the template. Perhaps, we should make a link on the template to Sects, and then have a Sects template listing all the various sects, Mormonism, Seventh Day Adventists and the like. Does that sound like a fair compromise?--Elamdri 22:30, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Thanks, Elamdri!

It is something I could endorse, in the spirit of compromise, and belief in Christian's working together to find common ground, rather than nit-pick on differences. This is supposed to be a "Conservative and Christian friendly" encyclopedia. Debating who is and is not a Christian is more suitable to Tom Major's wiki, or another one, possible, but not appropriate for Conservapedia.--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 22:37, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Elamdri's suggestion does not sound like a compromise to me, although I appreciate his input here. I agree that Protestantism could do with its own template, but I think that's a separate matter, as is a template for sects, which there's likely to be fights arguments over anyway! But his "compromise" is to say that Mormonism should be included. While that is a legitimate thing to argue, it's not a compromise.
The key is the phrase, "believe in Christ". Yes, Mormons "believe in Christ", whatever that means, but do not believe that Christ is God (part of the Trinity). Muslims also "believe in Christ" (as a prophet), but nobody would consider them part of Christianity.
There is also the point that most of Christendom rejects Mormonism as Christian. Now that may not be the ultimate arbiter of the issue, but it's not to be ignored or lightly dismissed, either.
Philip J. Rayment 22:48, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Well, actually, if you read it, I actually think we should just make a sects template, and I think that would solve the problem. After all, I think the legitimatcy of a sect is and individual decision. Allowing people to navigate to the mormon page using the Christianity template without having it directly on the template would still allow axcess without excessive advertising or endorsing of Mormonism--Elamdri 22:54, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Many people would disagree with their group being included under the label of "sect". Philip J. Rayment 23:38, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Without passing any judgement on the finer points, This is supposed to be a "Conservative and Christian friendly" encyclopedia. Debating who is and is not a Christian is more suitable to Tom Major's wiki, or another one, possibly, but not appropriate for Conservapedia, IMO.--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 22:52, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
It's a bit meaningless claiming to be "Christian-friendly" if we don't know what "Christian" means. Philip J. Rayment 23:38, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Philip, in all respect, this is getting a bit tedious. All but the moronic "know" what being a Christian, loosely, means. So long as our articles are factual, and all those sects are represented, the users can figure it out, no? Or are you implying people, generally, are too stupid to do so, without our guidance? It is not the job of an encyclopedia to define what it is, on its own. It is the job of an encyclopedia to report what others have found, giving the reader the facts to make their own informed decision. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 00:05, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Yes, they know loosely, but when there is dispute over issues like this, "loosely" is not sufficient. Philip J. Rayment 03:27, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Wish you would IM me! Dang! You wear my fingers to the bone emailing! --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 05:07, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Okay, after discussing this at length with TK off Conservapedia, I have come to realise that the word "sect" apparently doesn't have the negative connotations in the U.S. that it has here in Oz. So in the hope that no Mormons object, I'm happy to go along, in principle at least, with the idea of a separate "sect" template as proposed by Elamdri. Philip J. Rayment 10:01, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

I will take this issue off CP with TK and Philip. I object to the "sect" template. Crocoite Talk 10:14, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

The question basically is, How is Mormonism divergent from Protestantism? That Mormonism grew out of Protestantism as a divergent sect is indisputable. What ever doctrinal differences that cause one group of self described Christians to state Mormonism is not Protestant or Christain hinges on the same question about Roman Catholicism and Christianity, that is, are Christians defined as only those who recognize the Canon of Scripture as 66 texts, or are there other texts that have been added in? and to what extent are the added texts Canonical, that is to say, who decided they were? then we see the similiarities of Roman Cathiolicism to LDS, both have essentially a human vicar or prophet on earth today interpreting what is God's Word, and not allowing independent readings by church members.

So, no one is discussing booting Roman Catholicism out of the Christian camp because the Church head interprets for the Church members what Scripture is, and adds other books at will. We've defined them both as Christian. But Mormonism, like Roman Catholicism, we also see an emphasis on a Gospel of Works, thus Mormonism has a hard time identifying as a modern Protestant sect, yet its origins in, and divergence from, Protestanism is undeniable.

So the question is simply, we should agree it is a "divergent sect" of Protestantism, and as a divergent sect, to what extent do we link to Protestant history and traditions. I do not believe Mormonism has that big an impact on the history of Christianity, like the Roman Church has, or the Protestant Reformation, that it deserves to be included alongside those two in a high profile template. RobS 18:11, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

  • Offhand, "divergent sect of Protestantism" sounds to me like a reasonable way to characterize Mormonism. Dpbsmith 18:59, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Mormonism is not a divergent sect of Protestantism. Mormons believe in a restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This restoration happened by divine messengers and modern day revelation. Protestants do not believe in a restoration of the gospel and they don't believe in divine messengers or modern day revelation. Crocoite Talk 19:16, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Protestantism is part of Christianity. If Mormonism were a "divergent sect of Protestantism" it would be part of Protestantism. If Mormonism were part of Protestantism it would be part of Christianity. Now we have quotes from major Protestant denominations of Christianity saying that Mormonism is not part of Christianity. We do not have a single quote from a Protestant denomination of Christianity saying Mormonism is part of Christianity. It is incumbent on those who was Mormonism is part of Protestantism to show a Protestant sect that accepts Mormons as Protestants. Conservative 19:57, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Conservative, please check your email. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 20:26, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Crocoite, by divergent, we mean divergent from the established Canon of Scripture, -- i.e., 66 books. Mormon's diverge from the recognized Canon of Scripture of mainstream Protestantism, as Roman Catholics do. This is not to argue or deny Mormons are not Christian; it is to establish (1) LDS has a Canon of its own; (2) Mormonism, while originating among several Protestant sects, is now outside mainstream Protestantism.
Few will dispute the above analysis. The burden of proof now is to show cause why Mormonism deserves recognition beside the Roman Church (i.e., roughly one/eighth of the planets population that claims a 2000 year history), and the Protestant Reformation, the event that sparked the ability of divergent sects such as Mormonism and others to come into existence. RobS 20:36, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Rob, Andy asked that PhilipR and I resolve the issue, taking the input from people here. We have done so. Please do not continue this, okay? If you have questions, please email either Andy or me. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 20:42, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
      • Andy said that Conservapedia is different from Wikipedia because we are governed by rules. Now the Conservapedia rules state that material must be true and verifiable. Those who have insisted that Mormonism be included in the template have not shown that Christendom accepts Mormonism as part of Christianity. No statements from major Christian bodies (denominations) saying it is part of Christianity. I have shown (and Mr. Rayment and RobS agree) that Mormonism is not part of Christianity showing the proclamations of major Christian sects. Now Andy Schlafly is a Baptist I believe and the Southern Baptist Convention says that Mormonism is not part of "historical Christianity". Now is Conservapedia governed by rules or is it not? I suggest that this be settled by the Consevapedia panel and that they make a ruling and included in that ruling they show that Mormonism is a part of Christianity. If the panel does not show that Mormonism is a part of Christianity, I can only assume that Conservapedia is not governed by rules ("true and verifiable") since those who say that Mormonism is a part of Christianity have not provided any evidence that it is. Conservative 20:54, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
By the way, I suggested a reasonable compromise that Sysop Crocite agrees with that the solution should be to have no no Christianity template. There would be no "template war/battles" if there was no Christianity template. I suggest we save the panel from deliberation over this issue and showing why the took the position they did (we should be governed by rules - true and verifiable) by having no Christianity template. Conservative 21:19, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Please be patient, consider your email, and wait for the changes to be initiated, ok? I trust you will be better pleased. :-) --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:21, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Conservative, I sent the email not to the one you just emailed me with, but the other one, that is the one you told me to use before. I re-sent it just now, via the CP mail. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:38, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
I have decided to check the Conservapedia email more frequently. You can use that one now. In fact, I would prefer it. By the way, how do you stop all the annoying emails regarding my discussion page updates. Conservative 21:40, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
By the way, I did not get any email to my other email address, but I did get your email to my Conservapedia address. Conservative 21:45, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Click on preferences, uncheck whatever boxes that suit you. :-) --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 21:49, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Christianity template - compromise position: 2

  • It would be helpful if you made yourself available other than just here, Crocoite. Many have been engaged in lots of negotiations, here and off wiki. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 19:22, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Thanks for the invitation TK. I will chat with you and the other sysops tonight on AIM. Crocoite Talk 19:31, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
I'll chime in If I have time.--Elamdri 19:40, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Well I don't want to pull you away from your Lodge....:p I had no idea of any planned chat, otherwise I would have posted some notice! --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 19:42, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Mormonism and Christianity template

From Andy's talk page

  • Yes a decision has been made. Per my email to you, and copied to Andy, he asked us to resolve this, Philip and I. We took all the input, and came up with the best solution, including something from everyone. You do not build consensus by insisting upon your way or the highway, and no matter how valuable a persons contributions here, or how appreciated their help help is, no one here dictates how things will go, other than Andy. If you have a problem, email him. But I am asking nicely here for you to stop. The issue has been resolved, so far as CP is concerned. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 22:46, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Resolved, but the resolution has yet to be implemented, so patience is required. Philip J. Rayment 23:19, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Implemented and done. Thank you all for your thoughtful input. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 05:51, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

There are two problems with the Christianity template which can be found at Trinity. One is that it includes Mormonism in Western Christianity and most western Christians do not consider Mormonism to be Christian. The second problem is that it list Protestantism and then list Lutheranism. Well Lutheranism is part of Protestantism so it is duplication. I would fix it myself but I don't know how to edit templates. Conservative 19:37, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

They are no longer considered part of Christendom? Can we at least try to be part of the healing? [[6]]--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 03:36, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
TK, you say "they are no longer part of Christendom?" I would ask you when were they considered part of Christendom? Can you give me some citations from major church leaders in the past from Christendom saying they were a part of Christianity? I would remind you that the reason why the Mormons moved to Utah was that they were not well received in Christendom in the United States. I alos cite: "There are, however, significant difference between Mormonism and mainstream Protestant denominations. The United Methodist Church has stated that the Mormon faith has "some radically differing doctrine on such matters of belief as the nature and being of God; the nature, origin, and purpose of Jesus Christ; and the nature and way of salvation."[4] The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod goes further, stating that it, "together with the vast majority of Christian denominations in the United States, does not regard the Mormon church as a Christian church."[5], while the Southern Baptist Convention states that the Mormon religion is "not consistent with biblical Christianity." Conservative 17:19, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
Conservative, perhaps you've forgotten that a LOT of people came to America from Europe because of religious persecution? Crocoite Talk 18:24, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Conservative, have you ever considered joining the Reverend Phelp's church? I have met the man a few times, and would be more than willing to introduce you. Would it be enough to conference call you in with Franklin Graham? Perhaps he could help you towards the path of Christian enlightenment....--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 18:31, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
TK, please be more clear and demonstrative in your post to me. For example, Phelps is somewhat of a common name. What is Reverend Phelps first name so I know we are talking about the same person. Also, how is Rev. Phelps relevant to the issue of whether or not Mormonism is a part of Christendom? Next, what has Franklin Graham publically stated regarding the issue of whether or not Mormonism is a part of Christendom and could you please provide a quote and a citation. Lastly, I believe at this time I have provided the greater body of evidence in regards to Mormonism not being a part of Christendom. I provided quotes of major Christian relgious bodies stating that Mormonism is: not part of Christendom/not consistent with biblical Christianity. So far you have not given one major Christian religious body which states that Mormonism is part of Christendom. Conservative 13:35, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
TK was refering to Fred Phelps, leader of the Westboro Bapstist Church, that has a strong message of hate against homosexuals and well just about everyone else too. Now, Conservative, either you're playing dumb about not knowing who he was talking about, or you don't get out much, because Fred Phelps has been very public in his ministry as of late. Thats why Bush passed the act protecting the funeral ceremonies of fallen soldiers, because Phelps had his church outside funerals with signs like "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" and "God Hates Fags." Phelps, like many extremist fundamentalist Christians believes that many sects of Christianity like Mormonism are not true Christianity. He's actually even worse with his perversion of the word of God than Jack Chick is.--Elamdri 15:35, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Elamdri, I think you owe an apology--to Jack Chick. I don't think you've studied him very well. Of course, I don't know your specific complaint against him. But no one has ever caught Jack Chick protesting soldiers' funerals.--TerryHTalk 15:51, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I don't agree with how Jack Chick's Tracts go about evangelizing. I am not a fundamentalist. I believe in Jesus as the Savior, but I don't believe in spreading the word how Jack does it. I think Jack prey's too much on people's fear of hell. People should be Christians because they love Jesus, not because they are afraid of going to hell. At least, that is what I believe.--Elamdri 17:17, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Hm-m-m-m. Sounds as though I need to write another essay, this time on what the Word of God really means. I'm not sure you understand. You see, I've studied the Bible fairly extensively, and I've studied Chick's Tracts, too--and I have to tell you, Jack Chick got it right. That might seem hard to grasp, but--well, the Truth always is, at least at first, and some people never get It...--TerryHTalk 19:56, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I wouldn't use the Chick tracts on the creation/evolution issue; there's too many questionable "facts" in them for one thing. Philip J. Rayment 20:55, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

I'm also wary of Jack Chick because of his bizarre claims of Vatican conspiracies. DanH 21:00, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Good question. Why are both Lutheranism & Mormonism listed separately without discussion? RobS 14:14, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church are the specific example cited in our Homophobia#External links to the ADL of "hate on line", and I placed the link myself. Phelps uses the slogan, "God hates fags", which runs contrary to the word expressed by other prominent preahcers, love the sinner and hate the sin. There was along, difficult argument over the definition and meaning of "homophobia", and as a concession to several very interested users, the External link I cited is definitive of their objections, unfiltered by other pro-gay websites and organizations. This, IMHO, was necessary to in the interests of fairness and balance. We do have a responsibility to make it obvious when a partisan view is over the edge of radicalness or extreme. RobS 15:46, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

RobS, just a minor point. Lutheranism does not need to be mentioned on the Christianity template since Protestantism is listed in the template and Lutheranism is part of Protestantism. And I think it would be cumbersome to list all the Protestant denominations on the Christianity template. Conservative 15:01, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I agree with this. So the larger question is, is Mormonism a brand of Protestantism. RobS 15:04, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Robs, given my above comments above from Protestant denominations and given a lack of statements from the other side in regards to branches of Christianity saying Mormonism is part of Christianity, I think the choice is obvious. Conservative 15:16, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
This was my objection -- the lack of discussion before putting it into the Template. RobS 15:20, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I'm not sure if it up to us to determine whether or not Mormonism is Christianity. What I like about Christianity is that we don't have (Save for Catholicism) a higher administrative body of clergymen telling us what is and isn't in our religion. Sects have risen up before Mormonism and they will rise up after Mormonism. Every single non-denominational evangelical church does things differently. Mormonism just does it MUCH more radically. But seeing as how we don't govern our own faith, who are we to say what is and isn't Christianity. I think in the end, that is God's call alone, and it is rather audacious for us to try and make that call for Him.--Elamdri 15:42, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
If we can't decide, then perhaps it has no place of its own on the Template. RobS 15:47, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Elamdri, I appreciate your civility and I respectfully disagree. We have branches of Christianity saying Mormonism is not part of Christianity and no evidence so far of any branch of Christianity accepting Mormonism as part of Christianity. I strongly believe that Christians have the deciding vote on what is Christian and what is not Christian. Conservative 15:55, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I have to agree with much of what Elamdri says. In the end, it will be God judging our souls, and not a group of fallible human beings. Anyway, while I think obviously Mormonism isn't traditional Christianity, I think it is definitely noteworthy as a successful spinoff/sect, and probably includes some consideration on this template. --Colest 16:07, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Fellow Conservapedians , I ask you to read the following article from an evangelical Christian 'We Have Sinned Against You'. A leading evangelical speaks at the Mormon Tabernacle and says evangelicals have spread lies about LDS beliefs. Here is an excerpt:
Fuller Theological Seminary president and Beliefnet columnist Richard J. Mouw apologized to Mormons for evangelicals' tendency to distort the truth about Latter-day Saints' beliefs. "Let me state it clearly. We evangelicals have sinned against you," Mouw said. The speech is making the rounds among surprised and generally pleased evangelical and Mormon groups.
I know that I have learned much in this continuing dialogue, and I am now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in things we have said about you.
I am offended by Conservatives repeated edits concerted attempts at removing Mormonism from the Christianity template. I am anxious to have Andy's and the Conservapedia panel's decision on this matter. Crocoite Talk 16:30, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Crocite, please do not misrepresent my actions. I deleted Mormonism from the Christianity template exactly one time. Conservative 16:48, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Conservative, Let me clarify my previous statement concerning your edits. The first time, you asked someone else to remove Mormonism from the Christianity template.
There are two problems with the Christianity template which can be found at Trinity. One is that it includes Mormonism in Western Christianity and most western Christians do not consider Mormonism to be Christian. The second problem is that it list Protestantism and then list Lutheranism. Well Lutheranism is part of Protestantism so it is duplication. I would fix it myself but I don't know how to edit templates. Conservative 19:37, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
RobS obliged. [per User:Conservatives suggestion)]. The second time, you did it your self. [7] Regardless, you achieved your desire... unless I choose to have an edit war with you, and I will NOT. I choose to discuss this in an open forum. Crocoite Talk 17:02, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
RobS, agrees with me on the template issue as he has stated at this website. And I did edit the template exactly once. Conservative 17:41, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Re: Rev. Phelps comment and Franklin Graham comment - I thought TK was referring to the Phelps mentioned above but I merely wanted to respond intelligently. I think the Rev. Phelps comment indicates that TK wishes to merely deal in rhetorical excess because he cannot offer any real evidence that Mormonism is part of Christianity. Secondly, I notice that TK has backed off his Franklin Graham comment as it appears as if Franklin Graham has never stated that Mormonism is part of Christianity (At least TK offered no evidence ). Conservative 22:59, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Conservative, I don't know that it's our job to boot anybody out of the Christian camp, that's probably between their own conscience and the Lord. Christianity, as I've always understood it, is a personal choice, and a personal decision, left up to individuals, not denominations. Let's end this bickering, it doesn't advance anything, least of all, what we together are trying to achieve. RobS 23:19, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Here Here! I agree. I feel that if we start down this path, we will open the door to limiting who is and who isn't a Christian even more? Who's next to go? Seventh Day Adventists? Lutherans? Methodists? Catholics(Don't laugh, there are people who really think Catholics are not Christians).--Elamdri 23:24, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Robs, I believe our job as a encyclopedia is to report true and verifiable information. You can say that it is not our job to boot anybody out of the Christian camp. Of course, that begs the question: Was Mormonism ever in the Christian camp? In other words, it is not our job to put people in the Christian camp if Christendom does not accept Mormonism to be a Christian faith. So far we only have reports from major Christian bodies that Mormonism was never in the Christian camp and that Mormonism is not in the Christian camp. I think as Conservapedia progresses that people will see the stark differences between Mormonism and Christianity. I would also point out that many Christian bodies do not accept Mormon baptisms and the person has to be rebaptised. Conservative 15:12, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
Catholics also don't share the Eucharist with Protestants. Does that mean Protestants aren't real Christians?Alessi 15:20, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
You're shooting wild of the target, my friend :) The disputed status of the Mormon church as "Christian" revolves around their non-acceptance of the Trinity, specifically that they believe Jesus Christ to be the literal "begotten" son of G-d, and not G-d made manifest upon earth. That's a whole bigger issue than rites and rituals, I would maintain. File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 15:26, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
Thank you for the clarification...i think i'll sit this one out and watch.Alessi 15:28, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
FoX, I don't believe you supported your contention that the Trinity is the only major issue in regards to Mormonism being Christian or Non-Christian. Conservative 15:33, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
And then there's the whole question of whether the Trinity's an intrinsically Christian, Biblical idea ... oh noes! Complex debate. Will sit out too. One quick solution - I can't wade through the whole debate - but why not link to a Christian Denominations page, where the matter can be explained in full? --wikinterpreter woo!
Conservative, I believe that the Mormon's first Article of Faith - that Jesus is the literal son of G-d, a separate entity from Him, to be the major difference, although there are other areas of Mormonism that I don't believe are consistent with Christianity - eg Endowment and Vicarious Baptism. Their 8th article of faith - "We believe the Bible to be the word of G-d as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of G-d" troubles me also, and their 10th - "We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon this the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory" I reject completely! As for my "not supporting" my contention - I'm not sure what you mean; do you mean I didn't post on the talk page about it? It seemed the discussion was not an open one and was being decided by sysops on IM. Far be it for me to rock the boat :) File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 16:10, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
I think as we develop articles on Mormonism the differences will be clear. I hope we don't produce garbage Mormonism articles that are not cited like this article at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exaltation_(Mormonism) 16:23, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

Christianity template - compromise position (from Aschlaly/talk)

I think there is a way to keep the Mormons and Christians who believe that Mormonism is not part of Christianity happy in regards to the "Christianity template issue". I think the solution is too not to have a Christianity template. If there is no template there is nothing to argue about. Who agrees with me that we should forego having a Christianity template? This way here I could create Christianity related articles with no problems to my conscience and not be concerned that a "Christianity template" which I believe is in error would be slapped on the articles I created (I don't want to be an unwilling recruiter of Mormonism vis a vis a template I disagree with). I could also recruit more of my fellow evangelicals or conservatives to create Christianity articles. So far I have recruited 6 people to sign up to Conservapedia and I wish to continue to do this. Lastly, I would like Andy to endorse my compromise and since Andy wants to keep disputes to a minimum and focus our efforts on creating more content I think he should endorse my compromise. Conservative 18:51, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

  • And the fact one of our own Sysops is LDS, how do you "undo" your insults? Please let this divisive non-issue die. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 18:57, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I agree with Conservative that the solution is to remove the Christianity template. Thank you Conservative for suggesting this solution. Crocoite Talk 19:01, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
TK, I have not insulted anyone. Because I assert that Christendom does not and has never embaced Mormonism as being part of Christianity does not mean I have insulted someone. I also believe I demonstrated this assertion. Conservative 19:04, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Cronkite, I appreciate that you have endorsed my compromise position. It is my hopes that Andy Schlafly endorses this compromise position as well. Conservative 19:05, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Can we please keep this debate in one place, and the obvious one is template talk:Christianity. In other words, no more discussion of this issue on this page. Okay? Philip J. Rayment 19:22, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Mr. Raymont, I want Andy to endorse this compromise publically as quickly as possible. Hence, I put it here. Conservative 19:26, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
The name is "Rayment", by the way. Andy is quite able to put his position (if he wishes, it would appear that he'd rather stay out of this) on the template talk page (which is the best place, so that future editors will more likely see it), so as I said on TK's talk page, a mention here that you have put a compromise there is in order, but continuing the discussion here is not a good idea. Philip J. Rayment 19:44, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Mormonism and Christianity template - Second compromise position

Given human nature, I would not be surprised if Wikipedia went through some the same issues we are having regarding the Christianity template. I suggest as a second compromise position that we put a category called "Restorationism" on the template and put all the bodies that belong to the restorationist camp in a restorationist article (Mormonism, Disciples of Christ, Churches of Christ, etc). Here is Wikipedia's Christianity template: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorationism It seems to me that there are many "restorationist bodies" and having them all would be cumbersome. It would be like having all the Protestant bodies (Lutheranism, Presbyterian, etc. ). Conservative 15:27, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

Catholicism

I notice a trend on this site to keep Christianity non-denominational. I am ok with that however, I do not want Catholicism diminished. It should be equal in significance. On this template, it links to Church just under Jesus Christ. It should link to Christ's original church instead of ambigous Church. People may object to its placement but it is in fact his creation. That acknowledgement does not diminish standing of other denominations, but I am sure to find those that disagree. Saints, as you know I am fond of, is not included in the template. Again, the non-denominational aspect. All of us can agree to the love for the Apostles, no listing for apostles though a few good books of theirs are listed:) I also know that religion is underdeveloped on CP, maybe because of GodWiki? I will continue to add Catholic pages, feel free to add to my work (or correct). --Jpatt 01:46, 31 October 2008 (EDT)

I see that the link is to an article which was a very brief article about the meaning of the word "church", but has been expanded to talk about the church as the body of Christians and more about buildings. I think the link should be to an article about the body of Christians, but I don't know if we have one that covers just that. Perhaps church should be altered to be just that. Philip J. Rayment 05:37, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
Personal tools