Talk:Christian theology/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Orphaned references in Christian theology

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Christian theology's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "EB":

From Grace (Christianity): "grace." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica, 2010. Web. 14 Mar 2010 .
From Purgatory: Encyclopaedia Britannica
From Trinity: Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, article Trinity
From Athanasius of Alexandria: Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. ISBN 0-85229-633-0 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum.
From Book of Revelation: "Apocalypse", Encyclopedia Biblica

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Wrong approach?

Latest comment: 11 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

I am far from convinced that the present article takes the right approach. Firstly, it is huge – and wikipedia in general deprecates huge articles. Second, almost every sub-topic on here is controversial – and the proper place to enter into the controversy is in the article for that sub-topic. I'd far rather see this page as a much briefer summary, with pointers to the main articles for each topic. What do others think? --mahigton (talk) 14:24, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the artile is overlong. We should work more (as I have in the past) on making it shorter. We should not, however, just avoid topics just because they are "controversial". I agree that most sections can and ought to either briefer or much briefer. I don't want to just start deleating the topics themselves. If you were working on this I am sure that would interest me in working more on it again, as I have hoped to.

I worked up to "Attributes of God: Enumeration"-- not that they are perfect-- but you may want to start with (sub)sections after these first few. I wish I had done more but it it did take a while just to those. ^{şṗøʀĸşṗøʀĸ: τᴀʟĸ} 15:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I was not advocating avoiding any topic because it was controversial. Rather, I was suggesting that the proper place for setting out, say, a range of views on the doctrine of the Trinity is in the article on the doctrine of the Trinity, and that what should be here is not another version of that discussion but a pointer to it. What a general article on Christian Theology can add to all those articles on individual doctrines and theological topics is, presumably, a brief indication of which topics come up in Christian Theology, and how those topics hang together. One difficulty is that different theological approaches highlight different topics, and arrange them in different ways - and a Wikipedia article should not be privileging any one approach over others. I'm not meaning to cast aspersions on the quality of any of the material currently in the article - and certainly not to criticise the work you've done on the early sections - simply to work out how a briefer article, which better reflects the variety of forms of Christian theology, might look. And I'm not at all sure what the answer is.--mahigton (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I was going to post a simple "Yes, let's do that" until I got to your last comment. Not sure what your point is in saying, "I'm not at all sure what the answer is." Rather than their being one answer, we just need to edit the article down. ^{şṗøʀĸşṗøʀĸ: τᴀʟĸ} 16:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I just came across this article. What a mess it is! It is so long and twisting that I am not even sure it can achieve "salvation". And there are many, many errors and WP:OR items. E.g. Those tree diagrams have no source and I had marked them as such. They are pure OR. I would not want to fix this article, and will not look at it for a while - it is gut wrenching what a mess it is.

Carl, given that you know this topic well, and have expressed a desire to salvage it, my suggestion would be to start a prototype on the talk page, use 30% of what there is now, and replace the article with the good 30%, then gradually regrow it gradually. Trying to fix this as is will be a mistake. You have my vote for a rewrite. History2007 (talk) 03:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

My problem is that "Christian theology" is not synonymous with "Christian doctrine" and therefore "Christian Doctrine" should not be redirected to "Christian Theology". They are two distinct concepts. "Christian doctrine" is what was set out by Jesus and his apostles. Christian theology did not come along until after the Biblical apostles. Theology is philosophy, not doctrine. Where theology comes in is where sectarianism comes in. Corjay (talk) 17:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

References

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

This page is seriously defective in giving some references only as, for instance, "Greene 2003, p. 30", with no indication of what book by what Greene is meant. An electronic encyclopedia really ought to take advantage of its hypertext capability to link with resources such as Google Books, where they are available. On another page - I don't remember which - an editor systematically replaced all such hypertext links with references in the style of "Greene (2003), p. 30". Although I disagreed with his action, I didn't resist, because I didn't want to add to a disagreement we had about some other question, and because on that page he was creating a bibliography that indicated which books were meant, distinguishing perhaps "Greene (2003)" from "Greene (1999)". Here, the necessary bibliography is absent. Esoglou (talk) 08:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, and the beauty of Wikipedia is that you are welcome to update the resources yourself. I've been meaning to work on this page for sometime, but have been very very busy. ReformedArsenal (talk) 17:01, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

I guessed, the only option available, at the source and inserted that. I think the original is correct. My attempt at producing a template that would cross-ref original with different page numbers did not work correctly. Student7 (talk) 21:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Article titles

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I find the titles of the theology related articles in relation to their content quite confusing. I would have expected the content of this article to appear under "Systematic theology" whereas I would have expected the content of the article "Outline of Christian theology" to appear in this article. What's your opinion about that? Marcocapelle (talk) 09:28, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

To make my point a bit clearer: theology as an academic field is much broader than just systematic theology.Marcocapelle (talk) 09:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Christian theology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Christian theology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150403111234/http://www.ibs.org/bible/verse/?q=John3:18&niv=yes to http://www.ibs.org/bible/verse/?q=John3:18&niv=yes

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Justification through faith alone

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

When this article uses the term justification through faith alone, should it not put, at least in brackets that this phrase is also known as solafidianism?Vorbee (talk) 03:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Christian theology. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140621050711/http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 20:59, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Christian theology. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 11:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)