Talk:Conversion to Christianity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Religion / Interfaith (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Interfaith work group.
 
WikiProject Christianity / Theology (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by theology work group (marked as High-importance).
 

Untitled[edit]

Could someone PLEASE update this article with relevant NPOV information?

IMPROVE! IMPROOOOOOVEEE!!!! -69.29.141.54

Think the POV's a bit over the top for a simple update.153.2.246.32 07:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree - I think this phrase in particular is biased: "In most denominations, infants are baptized before they can even know about Christianity. Other denominations, however, do not baptize infants forcing them to accept the faith for themselves."

this page needs improving[edit]

As i am not experienced with Christianity, i cant edit to it usefully, but statements like "in the third world" definately need to be cleaned up. Please leave a message on my page if u need help in doing so. Thanks! Bhaveer 20:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

His information isn't so awful, but his writing style is atrocious, and he has all kinds of headings with nothing in them. Clamshop 18:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)Clamshop

Is there a Merge there?[edit]

This topic seems to overlap with the content of articles like Believer's baptism and Born again (among others). To try to flesh this article out would merely duplicate the work on those articles (in my opinion). I saw that an AfD failed for this article, but would a merge be possible? Pastordavid 09:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

"Pre-Majority Conversion"[edit]

I deleted the "Pre-Majority Conversion" section which read: "Several churches, such as the Catholic Church baptize children a few days after birth. Mennonites and other denominations reject this practice." I found it to be too underdeveloped. Ejectgoose 08:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Working on it[edit]

I'm going to try and fix this page up a bit. Should I post the new content here in discussion before replacing the article or just go ahead and make changes? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Neffland (talkcontribs) 21:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Go ahead, be bold and make the changes. If someone objects, we can deal with that then. There is currently not a lot of editing going on at this article, nor are there currently any editing disagreements. Have at it. Pastordavid 23:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


Well improved?[edit]

I've substantially expanded the article, differentiating between reception through baptism and otherwise, and again differentiating between Churches with paedobaptism (most of them) and denominations with believer baptism. It would be nice if someone could contribute some details especially about the Orthodox Church and the mainline Protestant Churches.Lumendelumine 12:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I clarified the believer's baptism portion some.Akubhai 20:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
The Biblical Explanation section needs to be cleaned up and the Bible references should be linked to biblegateway to make it easier for a reader. Akubhai 12:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I shortened the believer's baptism section. In denominations that practice that, the baptism isn't seen as part of the conversion. A section needs to be added about conversion though, maybe something about the "sinner's prayer", although that isn't really very thorough. Akubhai 04:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Peer Review[edit]

I've added the "Peer Review" tag to the banner above, and listed this on the WP Christianity Peer Review page. You can see my initial comments on the article there. I'll see what I can do in the next few days. Nswinton 14:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Conversion through "Relationship"[edit]

I started a section called Conversion through "Relationship". The name could definitely be changed, I was going to say "Faith" but that seems to imply there is no faith involved in the baptism version (although this implies it doesn't involve relationship which isn't right either). Either way, it is just a stub. Please feel free to change or add. Akubhai 13:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha, I initially thought your new section would be one on "relational evangelism", and would introduce a new level of unwanted controversy to this article. Good proposal, though. I'm not sure how to really expand that section myself, but I'm sure some of our better wiki communicators will expand it when they see it. Nswinton\talk 14:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
The more I think about this, it doesn't seem right. I think the article needs to be reorganized. The initial portion should talk about how Conversion involves starting a relationship with Christ (with less Christianese terms). Then later there should be a section talking about how some groups view baptism as part of that conversion and others don't. From what I understand, all groups see the relationship or personal decision or whatever as necessary, but not all groups see baptism. It looks like we're trying to work backwards by saying what some groups think and then expanding to what all groups think. Does that make sense? Akubhai 15:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
That totally makes sense. The relationship section (renamed "conversion into relationship"?) should precede the baptism section. Perhaps we should lay out the article like this:
  • Lead
  • TOC
  • Basic layout of Biblical texts regarding conversion
  • Confession
  • Repentance
  • Relationship
  • Baptism
    • Different views on Baptism's role in conversion
  • Conversion to another denomination

I don't know if that would be ideal, but it seems to me like there should be more clarity in the how and why of conversion to christianity in the mind of the potential/recent/longtime convert. Nswinton\talk 16:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I moved a paragraph I found hidden down in the Biblical explanation section up to the Lead. It seems pretty broad and should be up there (based on the Conversion to Judaism article). How much should the Confession and Repentance sections cover? Something else I just thought of, isn't a lot of this covered under Salvation? Akubhai 16:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I was bold and made a change. I added salvation instead of relationship and moved it up. I got rid of the sections on infant and believer's baptism since the actual timing doesn't have anything to do with conversion from what i understand. Thoughts? Akubhai 16:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually, now that you mention it, this article might be redundant... I'm looking at Salvation and it's proposed merging to Soteriology, and I think those articles probably cover the topic much more appropriately than this one is going to. I'd be worth getting the opinion of a few other editors on this one, IMO. Do you think we should make a comment on those talk pages, or possibly the merge discussion and see what they think about this article? Nswinton\talk 17:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I guess I figured the inclusion of the Baptism talked meant "conversion" was more than "salvation" for some groups, but maybe they see baptism as part of salvation, I don't know. The part about coversion among denominations seems separate from salvation though.Akubhai 21:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I like the changes you both have made. Regarding a possible merger: if Salvation goes to Soteriology, I don't see how a seeker would ever find this material. (I don't even know what Soteriology means.) The redundancy that I see is between this present article and Religious conversion which has a section entitled Conversion to Christianity. What about merging this article into that section?

I just searched the Wiki index. Conversion to Islam redirects to Religious conversion. Conversion to Judaism is a standalone article. Converted to Christianity redirects to Christianization.Afaprof01 22:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
There was some talk of merging the article before (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Conversion_to_Christianity) but it was voted against. I think I like the idea of a separate article. Akubhai 23:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

quick question on image caption[edit]

Is there any way to have a caption show below an image besides having it formatted as a "thumb"? I think the image of Paul's conversion looks better ~275px, but the caption only shows with a mouseover at that size, and there's no links in the mouseover, obviously. Nswinton\talk 14:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

That should work although I think it might get overridden by user preferences. Not sure. Akubhai 15:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Speaking in Tongues[edit]

This could be a very touchy subject, but I'm wondering if it'd be worth it to add a section on Speaking in Tongues or being "Filled with the Holy Spirit" to the article, as many people groups in Acts and in some demographics since have had both those occurences as they've "received the gospel" for the first time. I know this is a very controversial point of doctrine, and I'm not totally sure if it's worthy of mention in the article. Any thoughts? Nswinton\talk 14:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I probably don't know enough about the subject to make a judgement call. Are there groups that consider gifts of the Holy Spirit part of conversion? I think some might consider it proof over coversion, if that is the case, it might deserve a mention. Akubhai 15:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Some charismatic groups consider it part of conversion, and others consider it proof of conversion. Nswinton\talk 17:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Speaking in tongues (glossolalia) is a phenomenon said to accompany a post-conversion experience variously called the "Second Blessing" and "Baptism of the Holy Spirit." While some experience conversion (being "born again") and receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit in rapid succession, almost simultaneously, they still are two different events for charismatic Christians. Let's leave it out of the conversion article. Afaprof01 17:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Fine with me, just thought I'd ask. Nswinton\talk 20:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Biblical explanation[edit]

I have an issue with the phrase "Baptism's role in the biblical text was pivotal." It seems to violate NPOV or is atleast disputed by many Christians. From what I understand, Catholics and LDS require baptism, but I think more Protestant churches believe you can be a Christian and not have been baptized. Isn't this correct? Akubhai 15:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, many protestant groups consider Baptism as an initial expression after conversion, not as a necessary part of the conversion itself. It's thought to be an "outward sign of an inward decision". They consider it important to the conversion process only in that one's desire to make the public show of baptism is a demonstration of their inner confidence in their decision to trust Christ. That wording it probably POV, but I think it gets the point across... Nswinton\talk 17:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
In the Catholic Church, adult converts show their "inward decision" by going thrugh the right of election. Such a person is a Christian with most of the rights and responsibilities of a Catholic, with the intention of being baptised in the near future. Once baptised the candiate can receive the Eucharist. (JLawson 6 August 2008). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.117.194 (talk) 23:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I've marked the section as POV as it seems to prove a point rather than explain - especially the part about immersion and baptism of believers etc. seems to be more of an argumentation than a neutral explanation. 84.215.54.126 (talk) 14:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Maybe, I would have prefered citations-needed (non-bible citations, though). It gives a vague impression that it maybe proves a point, but restructured and properly cited, the content should be OK as it is. Especially the third initial paragraph:
The Bible does not clearly state whether children were or were not baptized, so there is disagreement among...
should be a "context", i.e. the first paragraph, instead of the third, placed like a "conclusion". And citations/reformulations for exactly that para may be enough to NPOVing the section. Said: Rursus 11:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Undid edit by X451422[edit]

I just undid the last edit by X451422. It added a lot of talk of conversion through baptism to the conversion through salvation section. I don't see what the point of that was. Please explain. Akubhai 15:44, 10 August 2007 (UTC)