Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 9:
Line 9: + + − − :::Agreed, it does look more like an essay. I agree with the content, and I think scripture supports it, but it probably is a good idea to mark this as an essay. I've moved it. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 11:14, 22 November 2016 (EST) − ::::I do too, and thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:17, 22 November 2016 (EST)
Talk:Essay:Reasons the Catholic Church is Unbiblical (view source)
Revision as of 15:10, January 9, 2017
, 15:10, January 9, 2017Move portions of discussion to improve flow.
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 09:57, 22 November 2016 (EST)
:--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 09:57, 22 November 2016 (EST)
::When one does a Google search, the discription of Conservapedia under the link literally says "Wiki encyclopaedia with articles written from a Christian fundamentalist viewpoint." I support the article and I support moving it to "Essay:" as that is clearly the most appropriate action. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:19, 22 November 2016 (EST)
::When one does a Google search, the discription of Conservapedia under the link literally says "Wiki encyclopaedia with articles written from a Christian fundamentalist viewpoint." I support the article and I support moving it to "Essay:" as that is clearly the most appropriate action. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:19, 22 November 2016 (EST)
:::Agreed, it does look more like an essay. I agree with the content, and I think scripture supports it, but it probably is a good idea to mark this as an essay. I've moved it. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 11:14, 22 November 2016 (EST)
::::I do too, and thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:17, 22 November 2016 (EST)
:::I don't agree with Google's assessment of the POV of this encyclopedia. While it emphasizes "fundamentalist" ideas such as young-earth creationism, it has never censored or been adverse toward old-earth views in general or the view of [[Unification Church|my own church]], which is by no means considered fundamentalist. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup>
:::I don't agree with Google's assessment of the POV of this encyclopedia. While it emphasizes "fundamentalist" ideas such as young-earth creationism, it has never censored or been adverse toward old-earth views in general or the view of [[Unification Church|my own church]], which is by no means considered fundamentalist. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup>
::::That is true, and I didn't say that Conservapedia is a fundamentalist Christian encyclopedia (even though it is fortunately much more friendly towards my beliefs than Wikipedia is). However, Google's assessment probably explains why any editor would think that we are an exclusively fundamentalist wiki. It is Google's fault here, not the mistaken editor. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:09, 9 January 2017 (EST)
::::That is true, and I didn't say that Conservapedia is a fundamentalist Christian encyclopedia (even though it is fortunately much more friendly towards my beliefs than Wikipedia is). However, Google's assessment probably explains why any editor would think that we are an exclusively fundamentalist wiki. It is Google's fault here, not the mistaken editor. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:09, 9 January 2017 (EST)
== Regarding the source ''The Two Babylons'' ==
== Regarding the source ''The Two Babylons'' ==