Talk:Grace Communion International: Difference between revisions
→Article May have been Vandalized: yep its vandalism |
No edit summary |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:It was vandalism and it's been reverted now. [[User:Ltwin|Ltwin]] ([[User talk:Ltwin|talk]]) 00:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC) |
:It was vandalism and it's been reverted now. [[User:Ltwin|Ltwin]] ([[User talk:Ltwin|talk]]) 00:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
==Two questions== |
|||
Re: “...the WCG under Armstrong had a significant, and often controversial, influence on 20th century religious broadcasting and publishing in the United States and Europe...” |
|||
1. If this statement is true, should the article be rated higher than Mid-importance on the project’s importance scale? |
|||
2. Does this statement need a reference? |
|||
[[User:Tithe of the second tithe|Tithe of the second tithe]] ([[User talk:Tithe of the second tithe|talk]]) 20:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:24, 19 April 2011
Christianity B‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Religion: New religious movements B‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Update Beliefs and practices
As the beliefs of the church has changed alot, I don't think it is good to have outdated beliefs in place of the church's current beliefs. Armstrong's teachings can be found at Armstrongism so a large section in this article is not needed. I'd be fine with a small section on the most important beliefs no longer practiced, but leave the rest to what they teach and practice now. Ltwin (talk) 03:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. Much of this article is currently a history of Herbert Armstrong, the person, and not the denomination. The two are of course intertwined, but it seems unnecessary to have such a wholesale duplication of content. Why not just have a link to refer people to Herbert Armstrong?64.208.29.126 (talk) 21:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- Grace Communion International and Worldwide Church of God should be different pages. GCI under Tkach and WCG under Armstrong are like two different churches. The teachings of WCG under Armstrong are of historic importance. WCG teachings still continues today as United Church of God, Living Church of God, and other groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mewilson777 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree. While there have been alot of changes, it is still the same organization. Ltwin (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Not a Sabbatarian church
Links at the bottom of the article refer to "Sabbath-keeping churches." This seems inappropriate since GCI is not a Sabbath-keeping church. (evidence can be seen at www.wcg.org/lit/law/sabbath/) Further, it seems misleading to include Worldwide Church of God among the list of Sabbath-keeping churches (non-Adventist) because the WCG rejected Sabbatarianism in 1995. If the link has to stay, it ought to say "Worldwide Church of God (before 1995)."64.208.29.126 (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Article May have been Vandalized
Check the most recent changes. I am not familiar enough with the subject to determine for myself. Zell Faze (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- It was vandalism and it's been reverted now. Ltwin (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Two questions
Re: “...the WCG under Armstrong had a significant, and often controversial, influence on 20th century religious broadcasting and publishing in the United States and Europe...”
1. If this statement is true, should the article be rated higher than Mid-importance on the project’s importance scale?
2. Does this statement need a reference?
- B-Class Christianity articles
- Mid-importance Christianity articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Mid-importance Religion articles
- B-Class New religious movements articles
- High-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles