This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Christian fundamentalism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That the early Fundamenatlists were not literalists in their interpretation of Genesis 1 is clear from James Orr's article on this subject. Please correct the record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.70.141 (talk) 10:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
In The Fundamentals, which this section is siting, Orr wrote about the first chapter of Genesis, “There is no violence done to the narrative in substituting in thought ‘aeonic’ – vast cosmic periods – for ‘days’ on our narrower, sun-measured scale.”
The Fundamentals; a testimony to the truth. Volume 4, page 101. [1]
Whatever Orr wrote on other occasions, in his essay for The Fundamentals he directly stated that the first chapter of Genesis did not have to be taken literally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.1.115.217 (talk) 03:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
I have pruned a number of inclusions in this section simply due to the fact that they are not within the scope of this particular article. This article is about a specific movement within Christianity, and is well defined in the lead. It is essentially Protestant, and most within the movement would subscribe to the tenets of The Fundamentals (although that has drifted within recent decades). It consists mostly of Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and non-denominational groups. The items I removed are (1) Christian, and (2) fundamentalist, but they are not "Christian Fundamentalist" within this scope. They are "fundamentalist" within their own Christian traditions, which is not the same thing. There's a nuance here to be grasped, but because this is an article about a specific movement that has a specific definition, we have to careful not to drift out of that scope. ButlerBlog (talk) 20:24, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
May we have a clade diagram, showing how this lot diverged (and perhaps recombined/hybridised etc) from whatever the distant past and theoretical origin of their evolution is? Midgley (talk) 20:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I see the maintenance tag for the section "In Australia". How do editors feel about moving this section as-is into a stand-alone article and then replacing it with the following single paragraph?
Nowa (talk) 15:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, none of the references for the Range Christian Fellowship are reliable secondary sources (i.e. RS). The primary reference Small, for example, is a self published book by the wife of the founding pastor. I also could not find any RS after my own search. Hence, despite all of the work that went into it, I deleted that section as not being notable per Wikipedia standards. Nowa (talk) 16:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)