User talk:Yeoberry

Re-use the sources

Hi, I added one of the citations for Covenant Reformed Baptist Church to the page Providence, Caswell County, North Carolina. I think it is appropriate in terms of WP:DUE. Hope this helps. – Fayenatic London 13:57, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Good. Thanks.Yeoberry (talk) 22:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard

I'm a regular volunteer there. I reverted your listing because all listings there must be made via the button at the top of the page so that the maintenance bot that runs the page will work correctly. However, what you are requesting is a conduct dispute and DRN does not handle those. You need to go to ANI for that. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Eastern Orthodox Church

If you believe your material is appropriate for inclusion in this or any other article, I would strongly recommend you bring it up for discussion at a suitable place (such as the Reliable Sources Noticeboard). Even if this is in fact suitable material, it might be better placed in a more specialized article (such as Icon). The main purpose of the Eastern Orthodox Church article should be to describe the history, beliefs, and practices of the EOC — not to either defend or attack the EOC (i.e., no apologetics or polemics). It may be appropriate to briefly mention that icons have been controversial at various times amongst the church leadership — as shown, e.g., by the Byzantine Iconoclasms of the 8th and 9th centuries AD — but any effort aimed at attacking the validity of the EOC or any other Christian group through lengthy arguments against the use of icons is misplaced in this article (and probably any other article).

— Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 16:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Rich, Thanks for the information. Obviously the paragraph is about the history of the EOC; it's source is a peer-reviewed academic journal. It's not the purpose of an encyclopedia to suppress information that may be unfavorable to the claims of any group but to simply report on the available information. Wikipedia relies on editors of journals to determine the validity of information. This paragraph could be edited, even condensed, but that it has adequate citations and historical basis and is relevant to the discussion is without question.

The early church appears to have inherited the opposition to icons inherent in second temple, Talmudic Judaism. Hence, early Christians were accused of being "atheists" by Romans who assumed the absence of images meant the absence of belief in gods. Origen (184-254) responded to the charge of "atheism" by admitting that Christians did not use images in worship, following the Second Commandment. Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira (c. 305) states, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.” About the year 327 the early church historian Eusebius (c. AD 263 – 339) wrote, "To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error." Epiphanius (inter 310–320 – 403), bishop of Salamis, in Cyprus wrote, in Letter 51 (c. 394), to John, Bishop of Jerusalem about an incident of finding an image in a church in his jurisdiction: "I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loath that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person." He goes on to tell John that such images are “contrary to our religion” and to instruct the presbyter of the church that such images are “an occasion of offense.”Yeoberry (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)