Talk:Richard C. H. Lenski
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Category / Place of birth
editPerson is listed in "People of Bavaria" category.
ftn 4 says, though, that according to his son, Lenski was born in Greifenburg, Prussia.
That most definitely excludes Greifenberg, Bavaria, since Bavaria never was part of Prussia. (See article "Prussia") If you go to article "Greifenberg", you'll find there was a Pommeranian town of that name as well, now in Poland where it is called Gryfice. Pommerania was part of Prussia at one time.
If this can be confirmed, category "People from Bavaria" should be deleted and or changed.
Incidentally both the Bavarian and Pommaranian town names are ending -berg, but that should be a detail.
Sorry forgot my login details for the moment. Marc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.200.13 (talk) 22:17, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Arminian soteriology
editHello To editor Indyguy:, In the §theology I recently added the fact that Lenski adopted an Arminian soteriological scheme, which you reverted because there was no secondary sources. I proposed to you some secondary sources on my talk page -without answer. ---Telikalive (talk) 20:00, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
- This article patently false and misleading Lenski‘s theological positions. PK070205 (talk) 17:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hello To editor PK070205: This is possible. To correct that potential issue, you have to add sources showing another aspect of his positions, that will for example mitigate the current orientation of the article. But you can't simply remove sourced proposition when they are associated with relevant secondary sources, as you did. ----Telikalive (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Did anyone bother checking the source on this page, especially the non-Lutheran sources. I literally own his full commentary series Lenski's Commentary on the New Testament | LCNT (12 vols.) Perhaps, you can provide real documentation that Lenski adopted an Arminian soteriological. This is patently false if you knew anything about Lenski and Lutheran theology. PK070205 (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC) What does the Calvinist James White have to do with Lenski? 🤷🏻♂️ It is supposed to be a critique of Lenski’s theology? (2001). "A Reformed Response to the Comments of R. C. H. Lenski on Romans 9". Alpha and Omega Ministries. PK070205 (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hello To editor PK070205: Again, to correct that potential issue, please make a sourced proposal showing another aspect of Lensky positions. You can read this Wikipedia:Verifiability about expected verifiability of the sources. Then we can see how to consensually articulate your proposal with the current proposal. ---Telikalive (talk) 09:12, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
- Did anyone bother checking the source on this page, especially the non-Lutheran sources. I literally own his full commentary series Lenski's Commentary on the New Testament | LCNT (12 vols.) Perhaps, you can provide real documentation that Lenski adopted an Arminian soteriological. This is patently false if you knew anything about Lenski and Lutheran theology. PK070205 (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC) What does the Calvinist James White have to do with Lenski? 🤷🏻♂️ It is supposed to be a critique of Lenski’s theology? (2001). "A Reformed Response to the Comments of R. C. H. Lenski on Romans 9". Alpha and Omega Ministries. PK070205 (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hello To editor PK070205: This is possible. To correct that potential issue, you have to add sources showing another aspect of his positions, that will for example mitigate the current orientation of the article. But you can't simply remove sourced proposition when they are associated with relevant secondary sources, as you did. ----Telikalive (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)