Talk:Christianity

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2020

The section on Salvation says Matin Luther believed baptism was necessary for salvation. I am fairly confident this is not true. Rather, he believed and taught it was a means of grace by which people were saved but not that it was required to be saved. 107.12.190.130 (talk) 14:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk | contribs) 15:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2020

The section on Salvation says Martin Luther believed baptism was necessary for salvation. I am fairly confident this is not true. Rather, he believed and taught it was a means of grace by which people were saved but not that it was required to be saved. Here is my reliable source. https://reformation500.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/martin-luthers-understanding-of-baptism/ 107.12.190.130 (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

The tension between Luther's doctrines of sola fide (salvation by faith alone) and baptism is well-known and...complicated. See, for example, Pagan Servitude of the Church or this article: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/sola-fide-compromised-martin-luther-and-the-doctrine-of-baptism/. I think we also need to be careful with our wording: saying baptism "[is] necessary for salvation" and that it "confers salvation" are two different things. I'm not an expert but I've always understood that he saw baptism as an act of public justification and repentance before God, and it was that, not the baptism itself, that the salvation came through. It, and communion, also are the only two sacraments he recognized. Better wording might be "...believed baptism was necessary for justification leading to salvation". Anyone else? Jtrevor99 (talk) 03:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. In any case, blogs are not reliable sources. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2020

"Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world, especially in the Middle-East, North Africa, East Asia, and South Asia.[17][18]"

This sentence should be removed. Neither Prince Charles or the right reverend whoever of England or the pope are authorities on anything. They are certainly not disinterested commentators on this subject, nor are the sources quoted. The governments in the nations listed are either 1) staunch allies of the US and Europe or 2) countries under invasion from NATO and Western forces. The idea that "Christians" are the most persecuted religious group is nothing but Western colonialist propaganda. The Saudis are, after all, rather indiscriminate in their persecution. Just ask the Yemenis whom the Saudis and the US are slaughtering. Do the Iranians who die indiscriminately from illegal US sanctions, ramped up during the corona outbreak, count among the "persecuted"? of course not. Do the millions of Muslims in Iraq alone who have died from Anglo-US actions over the last 30 years count among the "persecuted"? of course not.

Please remove this sentence as the imperialist colonialist crusading whiny garbage that it is. For a secular nation, persecution is wrong, period. Leaders don't use particular acts of persecution to drum up fake support for their warmongering crusading agendas. And, in case Prince Charles hasn't noticed, capitalist swine like him have been running this planet, into the ground, for 500 years now. 2603:3023:50A:7C00:9BC:301:1511:ED0E (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

This was previously removed and reinstated, see this discussion. There was no consensus on whether it should be removed or included. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:35, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2020

This article, unlike the article on Rastafari, does not mention gender roles at all. It is a significant omission. If you are providing context on a primarily Black religion's patriarchal gender roles, the same treatment should be given to other major religions. If anything, there should be at least a link to a page on gender in Christianity under "Influence on western culture". 2601:602:9B03:3EC0:145C:D66D:6F6A:1A44 (talk) 00:50, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: As the template clearly says, ""Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected". If you wish to suggest an addition, please provide a detailed suggestion using reliable sources to support the text. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:22, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Demographics of major traditions within Christianity (Pew Research Center, 2010 data)

None of these charts are synced. From Christiandom to Christianity by country to Christian population growth. Is there a way that all these charts to not record different answers if there all based on the same chart? Doremon764 (talk) 06:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Few grammar inconsistencies

• "The Alexandrian interpretation, exemplified by Origen, tended to read Scripture allegorically, while the Antiochene interpretation adhered to the literal sense, holding that other meanings (called theoria) could only be accepted if based on the literal meaning."

- "....that other meanings..." doesn't make sense, either "that other meaning" or "those other meanings" would fit? Angus1986 (talk) 07:12, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

It makes perfect sense. "the interpretation holds that x is the case". Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2020

In the second sentence, please replace "messiah" with "Messiah". De-capitalized can carry figurative uses, such as a messiah complex, while capitalized specifically refers to the religious concept. 64.203.187.108 (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)