nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Talk:Catholic Views On Creation (view source)
Revision as of 22:21, September 18, 2010
, 22:21, September 18, 2010Created page with '{{Wikiproject Religion}} Shouldn't the title case be all caps? Or has that rule been abrogated?-MexMax 20:14, 11 January 2008 (EST) :Last I heard that rule had…'
{{Wikiproject Religion}}
Shouldn't the title case be all caps? Or has that rule been abrogated?-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 20:14, 11 January 2008 (EST)
:Last I heard that rule had been changed. All words are capped for Categories, but not for article titles. I hope that helps. Will we be seeing you at the contest? ;-) [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 20:29, 11 January 2008 (EST)
I'm thinking about it! Thanks LT, and thanks for the rule explanation too.-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 20:30, 11 January 2008 (EST)
== Recent Changes ==
You removed information stated within your own sources, including the prominent Catholic Cardinal who supported Intelligent Design. You have also gone out of your way to add a "Fundamentalist Christian" statement that has no place in the subject matter and is questionable at best.
I'm not going to play tit for tat with you. Either write the article based on Catholic belief or don't edit it at all, and that includes reincorporating the information that your own sources showed. We believe in truth here and an honest representation. If you find this too difficult, then go elsewhere, otherwise I look forward to having an article that expresses Catholic thought. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 02:21, 12 January 2008 (EST)
My article does express Catholic thought. I know that any dissent against YEC is automatically dismissed on this site as not being conservative enough, and I merely wished to point out that there are in fact many devout believers in Jesus Christ that do not share this view. I did remove information from my own source as it did not prove the point I was trying to make. If I am to be made to use information in a way that does not prove a point, than I suggest that everyone else be made to do the same.
However, my attempts at academic rigor have already become too dangerous. I have attempted to use the Bible to propose alternatives to YEC, and I am therefore a threat. [[User:Calcnerd314|Calcnerd314]] 07:51, 13 January 2008 (EST)
== Separate Articles ==
In the spirit of avoiding further conflict, I would like to suggest that this article either be separated into two articles or that it be clearly partitioned so as to indicate the distinction between "the Church's official teaching on creation (or lack thereof)" and the "views of members of the Church." While the ''Humani Generis'' may be the most authoritative Church document on the matter, the fact that a number of prominent Catholics (e.g. Pope Benedict) have expressed skepticism of the idea that a literal interpretation of Genesis is not something to be dismissed, unless you are of the belief that any disagreement with any proclamation with the Church precludes you from being called Catholic. Other Church teachings actually negate this concept. <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/CONSC.TXT</ref>
== Separate Articles ==
In the spirit of avoiding further conflict, I would like to suggest that this article either be separated into two articles or that it be clearly partitioned so as to indicate the distinction between "the Church's official teaching on creation (or lack thereof)" and the "views of members of the Church." While the ''Humani Generis'' may be the most authoritative Church document on the matter, the fact that a number of prominent Catholics (e.g. Pope Benedict) have expressed skepticism of the idea that a literal interpretation of Genesis is not something to be dismissed, unless you are of the belief that any disagreement with any proclamation with the Church precludes you from being called Catholic. Other Church teachings actually negate this concept. <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/CONSC.TXT</ref> --[[User:Economist|Economist]] 22:21, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:Theology is not determined by popular vote, opinion polls, or one-sided conferences. The Catholic Church speaks through official pronouncements, not through offhanded remarks. This is not that complicated. You seem to be searching for assurances of your point of view, but that's not objective scholarship.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:33, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
== References ==
<references/>
Shouldn't the title case be all caps? Or has that rule been abrogated?-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 20:14, 11 January 2008 (EST)
:Last I heard that rule had been changed. All words are capped for Categories, but not for article titles. I hope that helps. Will we be seeing you at the contest? ;-) [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 20:29, 11 January 2008 (EST)
I'm thinking about it! Thanks LT, and thanks for the rule explanation too.-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 20:30, 11 January 2008 (EST)
== Recent Changes ==
You removed information stated within your own sources, including the prominent Catholic Cardinal who supported Intelligent Design. You have also gone out of your way to add a "Fundamentalist Christian" statement that has no place in the subject matter and is questionable at best.
I'm not going to play tit for tat with you. Either write the article based on Catholic belief or don't edit it at all, and that includes reincorporating the information that your own sources showed. We believe in truth here and an honest representation. If you find this too difficult, then go elsewhere, otherwise I look forward to having an article that expresses Catholic thought. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 02:21, 12 January 2008 (EST)
My article does express Catholic thought. I know that any dissent against YEC is automatically dismissed on this site as not being conservative enough, and I merely wished to point out that there are in fact many devout believers in Jesus Christ that do not share this view. I did remove information from my own source as it did not prove the point I was trying to make. If I am to be made to use information in a way that does not prove a point, than I suggest that everyone else be made to do the same.
However, my attempts at academic rigor have already become too dangerous. I have attempted to use the Bible to propose alternatives to YEC, and I am therefore a threat. [[User:Calcnerd314|Calcnerd314]] 07:51, 13 January 2008 (EST)
== Separate Articles ==
In the spirit of avoiding further conflict, I would like to suggest that this article either be separated into two articles or that it be clearly partitioned so as to indicate the distinction between "the Church's official teaching on creation (or lack thereof)" and the "views of members of the Church." While the ''Humani Generis'' may be the most authoritative Church document on the matter, the fact that a number of prominent Catholics (e.g. Pope Benedict) have expressed skepticism of the idea that a literal interpretation of Genesis is not something to be dismissed, unless you are of the belief that any disagreement with any proclamation with the Church precludes you from being called Catholic. Other Church teachings actually negate this concept. <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/CONSC.TXT</ref>
== Separate Articles ==
In the spirit of avoiding further conflict, I would like to suggest that this article either be separated into two articles or that it be clearly partitioned so as to indicate the distinction between "the Church's official teaching on creation (or lack thereof)" and the "views of members of the Church." While the ''Humani Generis'' may be the most authoritative Church document on the matter, the fact that a number of prominent Catholics (e.g. Pope Benedict) have expressed skepticism of the idea that a literal interpretation of Genesis is not something to be dismissed, unless you are of the belief that any disagreement with any proclamation with the Church precludes you from being called Catholic. Other Church teachings actually negate this concept. <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/CONSC.TXT</ref> --[[User:Economist|Economist]] 22:21, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
:Theology is not determined by popular vote, opinion polls, or one-sided conferences. The Catholic Church speaks through official pronouncements, not through offhanded remarks. This is not that complicated. You seem to be searching for assurances of your point of view, but that's not objective scholarship.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:33, 21 May 2009 (EDT)
== References ==
<references/>