https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=DavidDeering 2026-11-10T07:17:39Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.35.14 https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:World_History_Midterm_Exam&diff=647044 2009-03-31T22:40:00Z

<p>DavidDeering: /* Post answers here for grading (the enrolled students have already taken this exam) */</p> <hr /> <div>== Post answers here for grading (the enrolled students have already taken this exam) ==<br /> 1.C 2.B 3.A 4.C 5.C 6.D 7.E 8.E 9.C 10.C 11.E 12.E 13.D 14.C 15.D 16.B 17.D 18.E 19.A 20.A 21.A 22.C 23.C 24.D 25.D 26.C 27.D 28.A 29.B 30.C 31.B 32.E 33.C 34.D 35.A 36.A 37.A 38.B 39.B 40.E 41.D 42.B 43.D 44.C <br /> <br /> Some of the honors questions are pretty hard, I have to admit. [[User:DeTorre|DeTorre]] 23:04, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> : Your score is quite good: 33. Right now you're number 1 out of 11 papers, but I grade the weaker papers in my class first. I'll let you know here if and when better papers surpass your rank as I grade over 30 more papers Sunday.<br /> <br /> : Congratulations on your good score!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:14, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :: Corrected score: 32 (I double-checked and mis-graded one of your answers). That's still quite good, and still in first place through 11 papers. I'll update status as more are graded today.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:09, 29 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ::: Oh no, I caught another mistake in my grading of your paper! Your score is actually a 31. No problem, you're still tied for 2nd place with 18 papers to go!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:07, 29 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> 1-C 2-B 3-A 4-C 5-C 6-E 7-D 8-E 9-C 10-C 11-B 12-C 13-E 14-B 15-D 16-C 17-D 18-E 19-B 20-A 21-E 22-C 23-C 24-D 25-D 26-C 27-D 28-A 29-B 30-C 31-B 32-E 33-D 34-D 35-A 36-D 37-B 38-A 39-A 40-E 41-A 42-B 43-E 44-D EC (boys)-D<br /> <br /> Thanks ahead of time for scoring my answers. [[User:Rockthecasbah|Rockthecasbah]] 19:27, 30 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> : Your score is 32! A tad better than User:DeTorre above, and just below the &quot;leader board&quot; (top ten). Well done! You can improve for the exam in about six weeks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:28, 30 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> 1-C 2-D 3-A 4-C 5-C 6-B 7-E 8-E 9-C 10-B 11-E 12-D 13-B 14-B 15-D 16-C 17-D 18-C 19-B 20-A 21-E 22-C 23-C 24-D 25-D 26-C 27-D 28-A 29-B 30-C 31-B 32-E 33-D 34-B 35-B 36-D 37-E 38-A 39-B 40-E 41-B 42-C 43-E 44-C (Male question)-E<br /> <br /> Thank you. --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 14:31, 31 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> 1.d 2.b 3.a 4.c 5.c 6.d 7.e 8.a 9.c 10.b 11.e 12.c 13.e 14.b 15.d 16.c 17.d 18.e 19.d 20.a 21.d 22.c 23.c 24.c 25.d 26.c 27.a 28.a 29.b 30.c 31.c 32.e 33.e 34.d 35.b 36.d 37.d 38.a 39.e 40.e 41.e 42.b 43.d 44.c (boys).e<br /> Am I destined for the &quot;worst 10&quot; list? --[[User:DavidDeering|DavidDeering]] 18:40, 31 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Ongoing rank ==<br /> <br /> Through the grading of 42 exam papers, including the one above, the top score ranks are:<br /> <br /> 1. 42<br /> &lt;br&gt;2. 40<br /> &lt;br&gt;3. 38<br /> &lt;br&gt;4. 37<br /> &lt;br&gt;5. 36 (tie by three papers)<br /> &lt;br&gt;6. 35 <br /> &lt;br&gt;7. 33 (tie by two papers)<br /> &lt;br&gt;8. 32 (tie by one paper and one online submission above)<br /> &lt;br&gt;9. 31 (tie by three papers and one online submission above)<br /> &lt;br&gt;10. 30 (tie by three papers)<br /> &lt;br&gt;11. 29 (tie by four papers)<br /> <br /> Congratulations to all the students for their superb work!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:04, 29 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> '''Note on the final scores''': the three top papers, scoring 38, 40 and 42, have a valid claim to add an additional point to their score due to the correct way that they interpreted question 20. Can you spot the flaw in question 20 that these top scorers identified?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:11, 29 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Suggested improvements on exam ==<br /> <br /> *In the chivalry extra credit question for boys, the good sportsmanship should not be limited to &quot;athletic&quot; contests. Non-athletic contests, including chess matches or exams, should also be subject to good sportsmanship under chivalry.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:34, 29 March 2009 (EDT)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Ex-homosexuals&diff=638901 2009-03-13T21:34:25Z

<p>DavidDeering: Removed strikethough vandalism and struck through unsupported vandalistic remarks entered by Aberrat in revision # 602186, and moved them to end of section</p> <hr /> <div>{{homosexuality}}<br /> [[Image:St Paul Preaching.jpg|left|thumb|200px|St. [[Paul]] defends his preaching (Giovanni Ricco)]]<br /> In regards to the question of whether or not [[homosexuality]] is a permanent condition, one of the earliest historical records regarding of the existence of [[ex-homosexuals]] is a letter of the [[Paul|Apostle Paul]] to the [[Corinth]]ian [[Christianity|Christian]] church.<br /> <br /> The Apostle Paul wrote the following:<br /> {{cquote|Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were [[Justification (theology)|justified]] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.&quot; - I Corinthians 6:9-11 (NIV)}}<br /> <br /> Today people still report leaving homosexuality and becoming heterosexual through their [[Christianity|Christian]] faith.&lt;ref name=&quot;wnd&quot;&gt;[http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56481 'Gay'-rights leader quits homosexuality - Rising star in movement says God liberated him from lifestyle]&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;bp19650&quot;&gt;http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=19650&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;http://www.cwfa.org/articles/4216/CFI/cfreport/index.htm&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;venus&quot;&gt;http://www.venusmagazine.org/cover_story.html&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;http://www.witnessfortheworld.org/blkexgbks.html&lt;/ref&gt; &lt;ref&gt;http://www.frontlinemin.org/wasgay.asp&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;http://www.charismamag.com/display.php?id=9019&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;http://www.apocalipsis.org/testimony.htm&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;http://www.baylor.edu/lariat/news.php?action=story&amp;story=13784&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> [[Image:6a00cdf3a9bf0ecb8f00cd973c56934cd5-500pi.jpg|thumbnail|200px|left|Ex-Homosexual and ex-&quot;gay rights&quot; leader [[Michael Glatze]] speaking to the mother of [[Matthew Shepard]].]]<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the President of [[Americans for Truth]] which is a organization which counters the [[homosexual agenda]]. LaBarbera stated the following regarding Christian ex-homosexuals who reported being transformed by the power of God:<br /> {{cquote|Another factor from my experience as a close observer of the “ex-gay” phenomenon is that many former homosexuals do not linger in “[[reparative therapy]]” programs, or participate in them at all. They attribute their dramatic and (relatively) rapid transformation to the power of God, and likely would not show up in a study of this kind. In fact, these “unstudied” overcomers would appear to be the most successful ex-homosexuals because they’ve moved on with their lives — as “reborn” Christians move on after overcoming any besetting sin.&lt;ref&gt;http://www.americansfortruth.com/news/landmark-study-change-for-homosexuals-is-possible.html&lt;/ref&gt;}} <br /> <br /> Peter LaBarbera's statement above concerning [[Overcoming Homosexuality|overcoming homosexuality]] certainly has some evidence supporting it. For example, in 1980 a study was published in the ''American Journal of Psychiatry'' and eleven men participated in this study. The aforementioned study stated that eleven homosexual men became heterosexuals &quot;without explicit treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy&quot; through their participation in a [[Pentecostalism|Pentecostal]] church.&lt;ref&gt;E.M. Pattison and M.L. Pattison, &quot;'Ex-Gays': Religiously Mediated Change in Homosexuals,&quot; American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 137, pp. 1553-1562, 1980&lt;/ref&gt; The results of this study are not surprising since Christian faith has shown itself to be effective in combating drug addiction. For example, Christian group [[Teen Challenge]] reported the following:<br /> {{Cquote|Teen Challenge claims of a 70% cure rate for the drug addicts graduating from their program attracted the attention of the U.S. Federal Government in 1973. Most secular drug rehabilitation programs only experienced a cure rate of 1-15% of their graduates. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), part of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, funded the first year of this study to evaluate the long term results of the Teen Challenge program.&lt;ref&gt;http://teenchallengeusa.com/studies2.php&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> Teen Challenge has a number of studies that indicate the high effectiveness of their drug treatment program compared to other programs.&lt;ref&gt;http://teenchallengeusa.com/studies.php&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Dr. Neil Whitehead is a research scientist and [[biochemistry|biochemist]] from [[New Zealand]] and his wife Briar Whitehead is a writer.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.narth.com/docs/mygenes.html Book Review: My Genes Made Me Do It: A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation<br /> by Neil and Briar Whitehead]&lt;/ref&gt; Dr. Whitehead coauthored a book with with his wife entitled ''My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation'' which argues that there is no [[gene]]tic determinism in regards to homosexuality (homosexuals are &quot;not born that way&quot;) and that there is abundant documentation that individuals are able to leave homosexuality and become heterosexuals.&lt;ref&gt;http://www.mygenes.co.nz/download.htm&lt;/ref&gt; <br /> <br /> Dr. Whitehead and Briar Whitehead state in their aforementioned book the following regarding [[Homosexuality Research|studies involving homosexuals]] becoming ex-homosexuals:<br /> {{cquote|The sexology literature reports a huge number of examples of change of all degrees from homosexuality to or toward heterosexuality. These studies have been so numerous that West (a gay man) in 1977 took an entire chapter in his classic book, Homosexuality Re-examined, to review them, and commented: “Although some militant homosexuals find such claims improbable and unpalatable, authenticated accounts have been published of apparently exclusive and long-standing homosexuals unexpectedly changing their orientation.”<br /> <br /> West mentions one man who was exclusively homosexual for eight years, then became heterosexual... (notice that there is no reference)<br /> <br /> Another well known author in the field, Hatterer (notice the lack of a first name), who believes in sexual orientation change, said, “I’ve heard of hundreds of ...(notice the dot dot dot) men who went from a homosexual to a heterosexual adjustment on their own.”&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Ch12.pdf From the book My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation by Dr Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead -Chapter 12]&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> The classic biblical commentator [[Matthew Henry]] wrote the following regarding the forgiveness and [[sanctification]] in Christ for those who [[repentance|repent]] of the above sins listed in the letter of Paul to the Corinthians (which includes the sin of homosexuality):<br /> {{cquote|How glorious a change does grace make! It changes the vilest of men into saints and the children of [[God]]. Such were some of you, but you are not what you were. You are washed, you are sanctified, you are [[Justification (theology)|justified]] in the name of [[Jesus Christ|Christ]], and by the [[Holy Spirit|Spirit of our God]]. Note, The wickedness of men before conversion is no bar to their [[regeneration]] and reconciliation to God. The blood of Christ, and the washing of regeneration, can purge away all guilt and defilement. Here is a rhetorical change of the natural order: You are sanctified, you are justified. Sanctification is mentioned before justification: and yet the name of Christ, by which we are justified, is placed before the Spirit of God, by whom we are sanctified. Our justification is owing to the merit of Christ; our sanctification to the operation of the [[Holy Spirit|Spirit]]: but both go together.&lt;ref&gt;http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/1Cr/1Cr006.html&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> [[Lesbianism|Female homosexuals]] and male homosexuals who leave homosexuality and become ex-homosexuals are often referred to as &quot;ex-gays&quot; and the [[Ex-Gay Movement|ex-gay movement]] became well known in the [[United States]] in the 1970s.&lt;ref name=&quot;xtoday&quot;&gt;http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/october/6.48.html&lt;/ref&gt; <br /> ==Ex-Homosexual Quotes==<br /> [[Image:Schnieders.jpg‎|thumb|225px|[[Yvette Cantu Schneider]] and family]]<br /> *Homosexuality is death, and I choose life. - Ex-Homosexual and ex-&quot;gay rights&quot; leader [[Michael Glatze]] &lt;ref name=&quot;wnd&quot; /&gt;<br /> <br /> *I came out of homosexuality after a powerful encounter with [[Jesus Christ]] and a desire to serve and obey Him. I can say with complete honesty that I NEVER have homosexual desires of any sort - physical or emotional. - Ex-[[Lesbianism|lesbian]] [[Yvette Cantu Schneider]]&lt;ref&gt;[http://americansfortruth.com/news/ex-lesbian-yvette-schneider-testifies-to-complete-and-permanent-change.html Ex-Lesbian Yvette Schneider Testifies to ‘Complete’ and Permanent Change]&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> ===Testimony of Charlene Cothran===<br /> In regards to female homosexuals leaving homosexuality, below is the tesimony ex-lesbian [[Charlene Cothran]]:<br /> {{cquote|Over the past 29 years of my life I have been an aggressive, creative and strategic supporter of gay and lesbian issues. I’ve organized and participated in countless marches and various lobbying efforts in the fight for equal treatment of gay men and lesbians. I have kept current on the issues and made financial contributions to those organizations doing work about which I was most passionate. <br /> <br /> As the publisher of a 13 year old periodical which targets Black gays and lesbians, I have had the opportunity to publicly address thousands, influencing closeted people to ‘come out’ and stand up for them selves, which is particularly difficult in the African-American community. <br /> <br /> But now, I must come out of the closet again. I have recently experienced the power of change that came over me once I completely surrendered to the teachings of Jesus Christ. As a believer of the word of God, I fully accept and have always known that same-sex relationships are not what God intended for us.&lt;ref name=&quot;venus&quot; /&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ==2006 Survey Finds Men Seek to Become Ex-homosexuals Often Do So to Heal Emotional Pain or For Spiritual Reasons==<br /> A 2006 survey finds men [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jul/06071302.html seek to leave homosexual lifestyle to heal emotional pain and for spiritual reasons rather than outside pressure.] In addition, there is [[Homosexuality and Mental Health|other data]] that supports the above 2006 survey findings.<br /> <br /> ==Reparative Therapy==<br /> There have been several studies regarding homosexuals becoming ex-homosexuals. For example, on September 13, 2007 [[Christianity Today]] published an article entitled ''An Older Wiser Ex-Gay Movement'' and below is an excerpt from that article which focuses on [[Reparative Therapy|reparative therapy]]:<br /> {{cquote|Since its beginnings in the 1970s, the ex-gay movement has engaged gay advocates in a battle of testimonies. Transformed ex-gay leaders are the best argument for their movement. Likewise, those who've left the ex-gay movement in despair and disgust are the best counterargument. The debate continued this June, when Exodus International held its 32nd annual conference in Irvine, California, featuring dozens of speakers and seminar leaders who have quit homosexuality. Down the road outside the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center, a news conference featured three former Exodus leaders saying &quot;ex-gay&quot; is a delusion.<br /> <br /> New research may change the terms of debate. Psychologists Stanton Jones of Wheaton College and Mark Yarhouse of [[Regent University]] released today a book detailing their findings from the first three years of an ongoing study. They are investigating participants in 16 different ex-gay programs associated with Exodus, the largest ex-gay ministry group.&lt;ref name=&quot;xtoday&quot; /&gt;}}<br /> <br /> The study started out with 98 people with 72 of them being men and 26 of them being women.&lt;ref name=&quot;bp26429&quot;&gt;http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=26429&lt;/ref&gt; Some of the participants quit the study because they believe they had positively changed and didn't see a need to continue while others quit because they decided they didn't want to change from a homosexual to a ex-homosexual. &lt;ref name=&quot;bp26429&quot; /&gt; As a result, 73 subjects completed the study.&lt;ref name=&quot;bp26429&quot; /&gt;<br /> <br /> According to the Baptist Press (notice the fair and balanced resource) here are the results: 15 percent of subjects experienced substantial change; &quot;23 percent said their conversion was successful and that [[homosexual attraction]] was either missing or &quot;present only incidentally or in a way that does not seem to bring about distress.&quot; They were labeled &quot;success: chastity.&quot;; 29 percent of subjects experienced modest success; 15 percent of subjects experienced no change and were undecided about what to do next; &quot;4 percent had not changed and had quit the change process, but had not embraced the &quot;gay identity.&quot;; &quot;8 percent had not changed, had quit the process and had embraced the &quot;gay identity.&quot;; and malfunctions in the taping of the interviews accounts for the remaining 5 percent. &lt;ref name=&quot;bp26429&quot; /&gt;<br /> <br /> Previously, Dr. [[Robert Spitzer]] published a study in the journal ''Archives of Sexual Behavior'' performed using reparative therapy had some subjects experiencing change.&lt;ref&gt;http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> ===Conservative Criticism of Reparative Therapy===<br /> Although many conservatives approve of reparative therapy there are many that do not which will be elaborated on shortly. Conservative Christians believe that a homosexual can choose to become an ex-homosexual, however, the point of difference is whether it was chosen in the first place. The Pew Research Center states the following regarding Americans' views on how homosexuality first originates:<br /> {{cquote|Asked why some people are homosexual, 42% say it is &quot;just the way that some people prefer to live,&quot; compared with 30% who think homosexuality is something people are born with and 14% who believe it develops because of the way people are brought up. The view that homosexuality is innate is more prevalent now than in 1985, when 20% believed that homosexuality is something people are born with.&lt;ref&gt;http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=764&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> Author and ex-lesbian Alma Kramer takes the position that [[Homosexuality and Choice|homosexuality is a sin and sin is a choice]] when she wrote the following:<br /> {{cquote|I made a choice in my life that put me in bondage for 20 years. While it is true that there were certain things in my childhood that happened or didn't happen that influenced my choice, I still made a choice.<br /> <br /> I Corinthians 6:9-11 proves that sin is a choice and that you can change. The New International version says, &quot;Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.&quot; WOW!! I am so glad we can change. I can remember the time when I thought that there was no way out.&lt;ref&gt;http://www.setfree1.com/2.html&lt;/ref&gt;}} <br /> <br /> Dr. [[James Dobson]] and other advocates of reparative therapy do not believe that homosexuality first originates as a result of choice.&lt;ref&gt;http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20061125_james_dobson_identifies_homosexuality/&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==Oprah Winfrey and the Claim of &quot;Born Gay&quot;==<br /> Pastor [[Darryl L. Foster]] of [[Atlanta]], [[Georgia]], a former homosexual, states the following regarding Oprah Winfrey and the issue of people supposedly being &quot;[[Homosexuality and Genetics|born homosexuals]]&quot;: <br /> {{cquote|On thing we have learned about homosexuality: it produces acute rudis indigestaque moles in some people. When Heche and Degeneres appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show to discuss their newfound relationship, Heche stunned everyone (including Oprah) by stating, &quot;I was not gay before I met her.&quot; You know Oprah; she was just going to be Color Purple honest. &quot;That confuses me,&quot; she quickly confessed. Considering the amount of time and energy gay activists put into pressing &quot;born gay&quot; templates, I'm sure that's not exactly what Oprah was expecting to hear. She was so baffled by the remark that she dedicated her next show to whether or not gays can change....<br /> <br /> Heche has now chosen to be heterosexual and to prove it she got married on last Thursday to Coleman Laffron, a Hollywood cameraman she met while working on a project with then lover Ellen. Was she secretly dreaming of a white, heterosexual Christmas while she was with Ellen? If she was, then can we theorize that many gay people really do want to be straight, but just haven't found the right cameraman/woman yet?&lt;ref&gt;http://ww.witnessministries.homestead.com/cm14.html&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ==Ex-Homosexuals and Former Sexual Abuse==<br /> The are studies which suggest that [[Sexual Abuse Being a Contributing Factor for Homosexuality|homosexuals are sexually abused disproportionately in their childhood compared to heterosexuals]] Dr. Whitehead and Briar Whitehead state in their previously mentioned book:<br /> {{cquote|“Ex-gay” support groups...report that between 50 percent and 60 percent of homosexual men coming for help have been abused sexually. This is confirmed by various researchers.... Ex-gay groups report high levels of male sexual abuse (up to 85 percent) in female homosexuals who come for help.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Ch3.pdf From the book My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation by Dr Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead - Chapter 3]&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> &lt;s&gt;This was later found to be false, as it has been (recently proven) known for quite some time that sexual orientation is genetic and inherent, and homosexuals should be accepted as creations in the image of God just like everyone else. Period.&lt;/s&gt; <br /> <br /> ==Religious Liberty Versus Exgayphobia==<br /> [[Image: PstrDLF1.jpg‎|thumbnail|225px|right|Pastor [[Darryl L. Foster]]]]<br /> Pastor [[Darryl L. Foster]], a former homosexual, states the following regarding Christian ex-homosexuals and their duty to speak out:<br /> {{cquote|We can step out and advocate for our beliefs (which is our right as taxpaying citizens) or we can remain silent and hidden, thereby giving credence to a false idea that there are no former homosexuals. The problem with the last option is our spiritual mandate to share our faith and our experience of change to the glory of God. In the church, we have yet to adopt a unified expression which identifies us in a non threatening way.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.witnessfortheworld.org/xgay.html Understanding Exgay: People or Politics?]&lt;/ref&gt;}} <br /> <br /> The African American ex-homosexual Christian ministry of [[Witness for the World]] states the following in a press release:<br /> {{cquote|Gay activist, Wayne Besen, who suddenly found himself at the epicenter of a new career playing CIA with the lives of formerly gay men and women, says the book which features first person testimonies by former homosexuals urges gays to “go back into the closet.”....<br /> <br /> “Wayne Besen is the nation’s foremost carrier of a debilitating social disease I call exgayphobia,&quot; said Pastor Darryl Foster of Atlanta. “It seems his entire life has been consumed by a fear that Americans will hear the true stories of change by former homosexuals like myself and bring an end to his phobic-laden gravy train.”<br /> <br /> Foster, who wrote the foreword to Closing the Closet heads Powerful Change Ministry Group International, a fellowship of 14 national and international ministries to homosexuals in communities of color who seek change from unwanted homosexuality...&lt;ref name=&quot;witness&quot;&gt;http://www.witnessfortheworld.org/pr091004.html&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> The Witness for the World Press release also states regarding homosexual activists Wayne Besen the following:<br /> {{cquote|“This man is borderline lunatic, he has become so obsessed in his fear,” said Foster. “If the book is about exgays, why would you use anyone else but an exgay? Besen should know better. As a Jew, he should know that the Nazis hated the testimonies of the Jews who escaped from the death camps. Their first hand testimonies of the atrocities heaped upon them were the only links the world had to the truth. Likewise, our stories and experiences as homosexuals are true. We tell them because we want people to know what happened to us, how we escaped and what others can do to get out. It’s absolutely ludicrous for Besen to say that my story is a lie when I am the one who lived it. He seems to have forgotten his own history.”<br /> <br /> Exgayphobic homosexuals like Besen fear that the message of exgays, when it finally reaches the average American will make sense and people will support the choice for change for homosexuals. What that means says Foster is that the grinding money machine mental health professionals have been making off victimized gays for decades will come to a screeching halt. Besen is simply a cog in that well oiled wheel. For such professionals who give big money to homosexual rights organizations in exchange for their &quot;professional&quot; opinions about homosexuals, keeping exgays silent and hidden has become an obsession.&lt;ref name=&quot;witness&quot; /&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ==Ex-Homosexuals and the Documentary &quot;I Do Exist&quot;==<br /> The Baptist Press wrote the following regarding the ex-homosexual documentary &quot;I Do Exist&quot;:<br /> {{cquote|Can homosexuals change? A new documentary says &quot;yes&quot; and includes interviews with people who say they've made the switch.<br /> <br /> The 48-minute video, dubbed &quot;I Do Exist,&quot; is intended for use as a discussion-starter in churches, schools and universities. It includes the stories of five homosexuals -- three women and two men -- who once were involved in homosexuality but are now heterosexual. Along the way, psychologists and psychiatrists give their thoughts as to why they believe change is possible.&lt;ref name=&quot;bp19650&quot; /&gt;}}<br /> ==Supporters of Homosexuality Are Doing Harm==<br /> Pastor [[Darryl L. Foster]], a former homosexual, states the supporters of homosexuality are doing harm:<br /> {{cquote|As I have said many times before gays and their lovestruck supporters are masters at changing and refining everything that convicts them. This is no surprise as the [[Apostle Paul]] taught us that they would even redefine the very image of God. They need a &quot;god&quot; who is &quot;okay&quot; with their wayward and disobedient sexuality. Flunder works hard to help people kick the drug habit, yet hypocritically allows gays and lesbians to continue in a [[Homosexuality and Health|proven path of destructive living]].&lt;ref&gt;http://www.witnessfortheworld.org/cm21.html&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> ==Regarding Ex-Homosexuals Falling Back Into Homosexuality==<br /> [[Image:Peter.jpg|right|thumb|150px|[[Peter LaBarbera]]]]<br /> [[Peter LaBarbera]] states the following regarding ex-homosexuals falling back into homosexuality:<br /> {{cquote|To homosexual and gender-bending activists, any ex-”gay” testimony threatens their central propaganda myth that some people are intrinsically (born) “gay,” bisexual or “transgender.” Some homosexual activists like Wayne Besen and the fellows at “Ex-Gay Watch” have dedicated themselves to discrediting ex-”gay” change by hyping the cases of people who have returned back to homosexual behavior. (Yes, change is difficult, but why focus exclusively on failed attempts? Imagine if someone tried to “prove” that overcoming drug addiction was impossible by popularizing only those cases of addicts who tried to go clean but fell back into their drug-abusing lifestyle.)<br /> <br /> As you read on, give thanks that high school student “John” was transformed by Jesus Christ (rather than by modern secular psychiatrists) and will not have to suffer the severe emotional confusion and deep loneliness inherent to “transgender” delusion. “John” is truly free now — to experience gratitude for his body, to fall in love with a woman, to enjoy sex in marriage, to accept the natural blessing of children and grandchildren, to worship and serve his God, to know joy.&lt;ref&gt;http://americansfortruth.com/news/why-we-need-americans-for-truth.html&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ==Hostility Towards Ex-Homosexuals and Ex-Homosexual Groups==<br /> Homosexual activists and [[liberal]]s have become angered in regards to ex-homosexual events and activities. Below are some incidents that have taken place.<br /> ===Matt Ott===<br /> In addition, the Center for Reclaiming America cited the following account of how a [[hate crime]] statute was egregiously applied to an ex-homosexual:<br /> {{cquote|In Madison, Wisconsin, a recovered homosexual who had left the “gay” lifestyle to start a family got into a heated discussion with an open homosexual about homosexuality at a gas station. The ex-“gay” man, David Ott, was holding his child in his arms during the entire incident, and neither man touched the other. The homosexual activist later told police he had felt threatened by Ott, and local prosecutors charged the man with “disorderly conduct” with a “hate crimes” enhancement.<br /> <br /> The “hate crime” aspect, stemming from Ott’s belief that homosexuality is morally wrong, raised the potential fine from $1,000 to $10,000, and jail time went up from a possible 90 days to one year. Fearing the possibility of substantial jail time, Ott settled, and received 50 hours of community service plus a mandatory attendance at “tolerance” sessions conducted by [[lesbianism|lesbians]] at the [[University of Wisconsin at Madison]]. A ground rule for the session was the premise that homosexual behavior is not immoral.<br /> <br /> The entire process cost Ott almost $7,000 in legal fees.&lt;ref&gt;http://test.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/fastfacts/HateCrimes2.pdf&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> ===Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) - Arlington County Fair Incident===<br /> [[Image:Rev. Louis P. Sheldon Photo.jpg|thumb|right|140px|Reverend [[Louis Sheldon]], Chairman of the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] and author of ''The Agenda: The Homosexual Plan to Change America'']]<br /> The [[Traditional Values Coalition]] reported the following:<br /> {{cquote|Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays &amp; Gays (PFOX) hosted a booth at the Arlington County Fair in Arlington, Virginia. PFOX has had an exhibit at this fair for the past four years.<br /> <br /> And, every year, intolerant homosexual activists have done everything they could to disrupt PFOX’s display. This year, they screamed obscenities, threw PFOX materials on the ground and demanded that PFOX leave the fair. One PFOX volunteer was hit because he is an ex-homosexual.<br /> <br /> Eventually, PFOX had to call in a police officer to eject one activist who was harassing their volunteers. According to PFOX, “This is not the first time that PFOX has had to summon the police for protection from gay activists.&quot;&lt;ref&gt;http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3129&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ===Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) - Virginia School Counselors Incident ===<br /> The [[Traditional Values Coalition]] also reported the following Incident:<br /> {{cquote|Parents and Friends of Ex-gays and Gays (PFOX) was booted from a Virginia School Counselors Association annual convention last weekend. PFOX had been officially registered at the convention and had set up a booth to distribute materials showing that homosexuals can change.<br /> <br /> The head of the counselor’s group asked to meet with PFOX leader Regina Griggs and told her that several of the items in the booth were offensive to school counselors. Among them was NARTH President Dr. Joseph Nicolosi’s book, A Parent’s Guide To Preventing Homosexuality. After offering to remove any offensive materials from the booth, Griggs was told that PFOX should leave anyway because it wasn’t worth their time to only distribute two brochures at the convention.<br /> <br /> Griggs told [[WorldNetDaily]]: “Some members didn’t want us there at all. They didn’t want an alternative opinion to the teaching they were having that afternoon.”&lt;ref&gt;http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2666&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ==Existence of Ex-Homosexuals is an Argument that &quot;Gay Rights&quot; Does Not Achieve Civil Rights Status==<br /> [[Image:Alvedaking.jpg‎|right|thumb|200px|Dr. [[Alveda King]]]]<br /> Dr. [[Alveda C. King]] is the founder of [[King for America]], Inc. which is a faith based organization. &lt;ref name=&quot;king&quot;&gt;http://www.kingforamerica.com/index.htm&lt;/ref&gt; Dr. Alveda C. King is the daughter of the late slain civil rights activist Rev. [[A. D. King]].&lt;ref name=&quot;king&quot; /&gt;<br /> <br /> Dr. Alveda C. King stated the following to the Massachusetts General Assembly regarding the existence of ex-homosexuals is an argument that &quot;gay rights&quot; does not achieve civil rights status:<br /> {{cquote|Thirty-nine years ago, my great-uncle, Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., delivered to mindful citizens of America a prophetic dream which envisaged all of this great nation's people living in the full exercise of all rights granted to them by the U.S. Constitution. My forebear's dream was deeply rooted in the American dream wherein the Founders of our Union saw every lawful citizen standing in dignity outfitted by unalienable rights from God to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness free from the tyrannies of personal whim and ideology handed down by kings, dictators, political groups, and yes, some institutions of democratic government....<br /> <br /> Yet, there is a larger body of science represented even by the above scientists that agrees that mature behavior patterns rely much more on social shaping and choices than genetic predisposition, such that these behaviors may be successfully modified by a variety of means. The food addict may eat responsibly, the alcoholic may drink responsibly or not at all, and the homosexual may live according to a wide range of choices as well. Thus, binge drinking, overeating, cocaine abuse and other behaviors do not have to be granted public latitude as a matter of right in this great nation. Certainly, these and other mutable behaviors may be practiced; they may be under constitutional protection in fact (under our privacy clauses), but they may not be granted civil rights or public protection.<br /> <br /> Again, if behavior or other aspects of personhood may be altered, then those aspects fail to meet civil rights status. Homosexual practice clearly falls into this category. As my mother, Alveda C. King has said, &quot;I have met many ex-homosexuals just as I have met many ex-husbands, ex-wives, ex-drug addicts and ex-lawyers. Yet I have never met an ex-Negro, ex-Caucasian or ex-Native American.&quot; The politics of preference does not jibe with civil rights legitimacy...&lt;ref&gt;http://www.kingforamerica.com/jrellis-testimony.htm&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> ==Senator John Kerry Comment Insults Ex-Homosexuals==<br /> [[Image:John-kerry.jpg‎|right|thumb|160px|[[John Kerry]]]]<br /> [[Cybercast News Service]] stated the following regarding Senator [[John Kerry]] comment which insulted ex-Homosexuals:<br /> {{cquote|Sen. John Kerry's declaration Wednesday that homosexuals don't have a choice about their sexual orientation has enraged individuals who identify themselves as &quot;ex-gays.&quot;...<br /> <br /> Shortly after Kerry made the remark Wednesday, reaction started pouring into [[Warren Throckmorton]], a professor at Grove City College in Pennsylvania. Throckmorton said ex-homosexuals expressed outrage to him about Kerry's comment.<br /> <br /> &quot;Kerry's views, unfortunately, present a view of homosexuality that science does not support,&quot; Throckmorton said. &quot;Bush, wisely, has reserved judgment and his views are closer to where science has progressed to at this point. I'm concerned that Kerry misled the country.&quot;<br /> <br /> Throckmorton, considered an authority on sexual orientation research, recently released his own documentary, &quot;I Do Exist,&quot; which chronicles the lives of ex-homosexuals.&lt;ref&gt;http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive%5C200410%5CCUL20041015b.html&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> ==Judge Prohibits Public Schools from Implementing Anti-ex-homosexual Curriculum==<br /> The organizaion [[Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays &amp; Gays]] (PFOX) reported the following:<br /> {{cquote|Montgomery County, Maryland – A United States District Court has granted the request of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays &amp; Gays (PFOX.org) for a temporary injunction prohibiting the Montgomery County, Maryland public schools from implementing an anti-ex-gay sex ed curriculum. <br /> <br /> U.S. District Court Judge Alexander Williams, Jr. ruled that the curriculum threatened PFOX's constitutional rights, including the First Amendment freedom of speech. <br /> <br /> In his opinion, Judge Williams noted some of the curriculum's biased statements against ex-gays, including statements claiming that `[t]rying to change one's sexual response to straight or gay is usually unsuccessful,' and that `[i]n fact, it is often societal homophobia that forces people to attempt to change.'&lt;ref&gt;http://www.pfox.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=41&amp;sid=3f6326facd8169669d328749f4c1cbe8&lt;/ref&gt;}}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ==See Also==<br /> *[[Overcoming Homosexuality]]<br /> *[[Causes of Homosexuality]]<br /> *[[Homosexuality and Choice]]<br /> *[[Teen Homosexuality]]<br /> *[[Homosexuality]]<br /> [[Category:Homosexuality]]<br /> [[Category:Ex-Homosexuals]]<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> {{reflist|2}}<br /> http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28799 An article about Ex-Homosexuals</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Ex-homosexuals&diff=636835 2009-03-09T16:05:09Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>Since this encyclopedia should be suitable for children, this article should have a clear warning.<br /> <br /> We don't want our children to feel they cannot choose for a homosexual lifestyle when they believe they are true homosexuals. This page may confuse them and should be provided with a clear warning. Children should know being homosexual is just normal and they shouldn't want to become ex-homosexuals when there is no such desire. I'm already horrified by the media which spends such horrible attention to homosexuality and I was shocked when my husband pointed me out that this information is publicly available to children.<br /> <br /> - a concerned mother.<br /> <br /> :No, you are not a concerned mother. A concerned mother would wish a happy, fulfilled and fruitful life for her child in accordance with God's Law, not an existence of perversion, sin and early death. Please don't pollute Conservapedia with your dissolute ravings. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:18, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> <br /> ::How does homosexuality relate to religion, perversion or death? I believe your reaction is inappropriate and does pollute Conservapedia. Please sustain from replying and let the site moderators fulfill my request.<br /> :::''Please sustain from replying''. My apologies. Could you possibly explain the meaning of that remarkable phrase? [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:36, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::You don't understand. If you don't live by a almost 2000 year old book written by sand people living in huts you don't deserve to live or are living wrong.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:42, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::::Oh, you sound really learned! I guess the Word of God has nothing on your insights. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:48, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::::Considering we've learned so much in 2000 years the words of sand people have nothing on my insights.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:49, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::::::And I refuse to believe any man with a brain no larger or smarter then my own knows what happens after we die or what happened before we came here.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:50, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> It strikes me that those 'sand people in huts' were pretty smart. What have '''you''' learned? [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:51, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::I've learned all major advancements between 0 BC and 2009 A.D. I've learned why the sun rises in the morning and sets at night and I don't say because &quot;God did it&quot;. I've learned how to heal wounds that would have been death sentences in their day. Ugh I really don't want to go through the 10000+ things I know better then the people in Palestine in the early ADs.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:55, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::You've learned a few technical tricks that weren't known in the years of Our Lord. But you have forgotten the secrets of true happiness and eternal life. Not a good bargain on your part, I'd say, and if I were you I'd sue Professor Dawkins. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:58, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::Never read Dawkins. Like I said before I was blocked (You'll be surprised how many open networks there are around my house) I don't accept what anyone else has to say about after we die. I prefer to make my own views on subjects like that. I have not forgotten the secrets of true happiness I have learned them. I'm very happy with myself, my family, and everything I've created without thinking &quot;God did it&quot;. Honestly though I really don't hate anyone who believes in God. Thats fine good for you and them but I really don't like how people push it off onto other people or do things in it's name.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:09, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> This is a Christian Conservative encyclopedia. There are plenty of other outlets for your viewpoint. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 19:11, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::True there are. But there are some of your editors such as conservative who have been trying to start a holy war against us. It's rather concerning and actions such as those demand reaction.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:13, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::Further more at one time I was in a religious school (where some actions were committed by the admins that forever poisoned my relationship with the Catholic Church) I did have to read and study the bible. I find many of the things on this site to be exact contradictions of what exactly Jesus said in the New Testament--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:17, 2 January 2009 (EST).<br /> :::::Conservative is our leading theorist and commentator on atheism, and is skilled in showing the rag-tag-and-bobtail shortcomings of that creed. Holy War? I think that he would like nothing so much as the chance to debate openly with you or your colleagues. As far as I am aware, no-one has yet been courageous enough to take up his gauntlet. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 19:19, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::::I doubt conservative has ever even met any atheist beside those 15 year old ones in High Schools. He's pushing for the atheism and homosexuality to be further up in search engines then he puts on his page how atheism is going to be destroyed on the internet in 2009. People have attempted to debate him but have just been blocked by other editors quickly.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:24, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> It would be blasphemous to clai that Conservapedia met all of Jesus' standards, Of course we do not. We try, and sometimes fail. But to condemn this entire project, and to condemn Christianity and Christians, on those grounds is ludicrous - indeed, nihilistic. All man can do is to seek to imitate God. Failure is inevitable, but it is the nature of the struggle waged - here and elsewhere - that is important. I'd end by protesting against your unfair and inaccurate characterisation of Conservative, a hugely respected senior figure here. I'd like to debate more, but it is 00.30 here and I need to sleep. Regards. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 19:30, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :By that logic you can say that even though Atheist don't believe in God or follow all of Jesus' standards we cannot condemn all atheist. Ugh I hate nihilist with a passion so I'll ignore that. If conservative ever wished to have a fair open debate or disscussion with athetist or homosexuals I'm sure that it can be arranged on a nuetral wiki where nobody would be blocked over petty reasons.You seem the more rational of the group here. I'll prob stop by every so often just to tease you into a debate. Anyhow goodnight.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:35, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> <br /> '''Possible Vandalism?'''<br /> I don't want to step on the toes of those who have produced this page; but it looks to me like the section on &quot;Ex-Homosexuals and Former Sexual Abuse&quot; has been vandalized by someone pushing the &quot;born gay&quot; viewpoint.[[User:DavidDeering|DavidDeering]] 12:05, 9 March 2009 (EDT)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Ex-homosexuals&diff=636833 2009-03-09T16:04:08Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>Since this encyclopedia should be suitable for children, this article should have a clear warning.<br /> <br /> We don't want our children to feel they cannot choose for a homosexual lifestyle when they believe they are true homosexuals. This page may confuse them and should be provided with a clear warning. Children should know being homosexual is just normal and they shouldn't want to become ex-homosexuals when there is no such desire. I'm already horrified by the media which spends such horrible attention to homosexuality and I was shocked when my husband pointed me out that this information is publicly available to children.<br /> <br /> - a concerned mother.<br /> <br /> :No, you are not a concerned mother. A concerned mother would wish a happy, fulfilled and fruitful life for her child in accordance with God's Law, not an existence of perversion, sin and early death. Please don't pollute Conservapedia with your dissolute ravings. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:18, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> <br /> ::How does homosexuality relate to religion, perversion or death? I believe your reaction is inappropriate and does pollute Conservapedia. Please sustain from replying and let the site moderators fulfill my request.<br /> :::''Please sustain from replying''. My apologies. Could you possibly explain the meaning of that remarkable phrase? [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:36, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::You don't understand. If you don't live by a almost 2000 year old book written by sand people living in huts you don't deserve to live or are living wrong.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:42, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::::Oh, you sound really learned! I guess the Word of God has nothing on your insights. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:48, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::::Considering we've learned so much in 2000 years the words of sand people have nothing on my insights.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:49, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::::::And I refuse to believe any man with a brain no larger or smarter then my own knows what happens after we die or what happened before we came here.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:50, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> It strikes me that those 'sand people in huts' were pretty smart. What have '''you''' learned? [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:51, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::I've learned all major advancements between 0 BC and 2009 A.D. I've learned why the sun rises in the morning and sets at night and I don't say because &quot;God did it&quot;. I've learned how to heal wounds that would have been death sentences in their day. Ugh I really don't want to go through the 10000+ things I know better then the people in Palestine in the early ADs.--[[User:CindyB|CindyB]] 18:55, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::You've learned a few technical tricks that weren't known in the years of Our Lord. But you have forgotten the secrets of true happiness and eternal life. Not a good bargain on your part, I'd say, and if I were you I'd sue Professor Dawkins. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 18:58, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::Never read Dawkins. Like I said before I was blocked (You'll be surprised how many open networks there are around my house) I don't accept what anyone else has to say about after we die. I prefer to make my own views on subjects like that. I have not forgotten the secrets of true happiness I have learned them. I'm very happy with myself, my family, and everything I've created without thinking &quot;God did it&quot;. Honestly though I really don't hate anyone who believes in God. Thats fine good for you and them but I really don't like how people push it off onto other people or do things in it's name.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:09, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> This is a Christian Conservative encyclopedia. There are plenty of other outlets for your viewpoint. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 19:11, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :::True there are. But there are some of your editors such as conservative who have been trying to start a holy war against us. It's rather concerning and actions such as those demand reaction.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:13, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::Further more at one time I was in a religious school (where some actions were committed by the admins that forever poisoned my relationship with the Catholic Church) I did have to read and study the bible. I find many of the things on this site to be exact contradictions of what exactly Jesus said in the New Testament--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:17, 2 January 2009 (EST).<br /> :::::Conservative is our leading theorist and commentator on atheism, and is skilled in showing the rag-tag-and-bobtail shortcomings of that creed. Holy War? I think that he would like nothing so much as the chance to debate openly with you or your colleagues. As far as I am aware, no-one has yet been courageous enough to take up his gauntlet. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 19:19, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> ::::::I doubt conservative has ever even met any atheist beside those 15 year old ones in High Schools. He's pushing for the atheism and homosexuality to be further up in search engines then he puts on his page how atheism is going to be destroyed on the internet in 2009. People have attempted to debate him but have just been blocked by other editors quickly.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:24, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> It would be blasphemous to clai that Conservapedia met all of Jesus' standards, Of course we do not. We try, and sometimes fail. But to condemn this entire project, and to condemn Christianity and Christians, on those grounds is ludicrous - indeed, nihilistic. All man can do is to seek to imitate God. Failure is inevitable, but it is the nature of the struggle waged - here and elsewhere - that is important. I'd end by protesting against your unfair and inaccurate characterisation of Conservative, a hugely respected senior figure here. I'd like to debate more, but it is 00.30 here and I need to sleep. Regards. [[User:Bradlaugh|Bradlaugh]] 19:30, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> :By that logic you can say that even though Atheist don't believe in God or follow all of Jesus' standards we cannot condemn all atheist. Ugh I hate nihilist with a passion so I'll ignore that. If conservative ever wished to have a fair open debate or disscussion with athetist or homosexuals I'm sure that it can be arranged on a nuetral wiki where nobody would be blocked over petty reasons.You seem the more rational of the group here. I'll prob stop by every so often just to tease you into a debate. Anyhow goodnight.--[[User:JameF|JameF]] 19:35, 2 January 2009 (EST)<br /> <br /> Possible Vandalism?<br /> I don't want to step on the toes of those who have produced this page; but it looks to me like the section on &quot;Ex-Homosexuals and Former Sexual Abuse&quot; has been vandalized by someone pushing the &quot;born gay&quot; viewpoint.</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Queer_theory&diff=636830 2009-03-09T15:54:54Z

<p>DavidDeering: Signed comment</p> <hr /> <div>If there is any point to that article beyond promoting gender confusion as pervasive, I don't see it. That certainly doesn't seem like any sort of &quot;conservative&quot; viewpoint to me. It seems rather like liberal propaganda.[[User:DavidDeering|DavidDeering]] 11:54, 9 March 2009 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ::I quite agree. And even if one can swallow its moral unwholesomeness, it deserves to be deleted for its use of 'lit crit' jargon. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:20, 14 October 2008 (EDT)<br /> :::Au contraire, Bugler. It is not a reason to delete the article, but rather a reason to keep the article as another example of professor values and the homosexual agenda at work. I've rewritten it to take out most of the excessively liberal viewpoint and now think the article reflects reality better. The only thing I wasn't sure about was the Ernest Hemingway point, but but one exception does not a trend make. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 15:55, 19 October 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ==Shakespeare?==<br /> ''It is also criticized for bringing analyses of homosexuality and gender confusion to classic texts that are hardly suggestive of any genderbending or homosexual themes, such as Shakespeare...'' Um, am I reading this right? That it is saying there is no genderbending in Shakespeare? Referring to those plays in which girls' parts were performed by boys, and in many of which various characters are disguised as the opposite gender? So there would be boys playing girls who are pretending to be boys? No genderbending? Just checking. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 22:58, 13 November 2008 (EST)<br /> :Twelfth Night comes to mind. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 23:00, 13 November 2008 (EST)<br /> :I notice there aren't any citations for this page. I've never heard of queer theory, so it's hard for me to tell what is right and what is made up. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 23:01, 13 November 2008 (EST)<br /> ::You're probably lucky enough to have gone to a conservative enough college (or gone to college long enough ago) that you wouldn't have heard of queer theory. It's a revisionist approach to literature -- the professors do it to have an edgy and new approach, but all it does is facilitate a reading of homosexual themes into places where they don't belong, nor were they intended by the authors. Shakespeare, Lewis Carroll, Jane Austen, etc, all these great world literary figures didn't intend any homosexual themes in their literary works, yet these queer theorists are purposefully misinterpreting the texts to have these themes. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 03:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)<br /> :::I went to an extremely liberal college, but I was in the engineering program. (My only English class involved reading science fictuion.) But I did see Twelfth Night in high school, and there was a lot of generbending going on, and history (the non-revised kind) tells us that when the plays were performed men played all the parts. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 12:46, 15 November 2008 (EST)<br /> ::::I am aware that in Greek theater and the theater of Shakespeare's time, all the roles were played by men. This was the standard, because the men held the respectable jobs and women (for the most part) stayed at home and tended to the numerous domestic duties -- don't forget that it was a full time job! However, just because all the roles were acted by men, does not mean that there was a homosexual context to the acting, and moreover, it doesn't mean that Shakespeare wanted homosexual themes in his plays. I don't suppose you think Julius Caesar's cabal of conspirators was some homosexual love pact, do you? -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 15:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)<br /> :::::[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]], have you seen Twelfth Night? ''the professors do it to have an edgy and new approach, but all it does is facilitate a reading of homosexual themes into places where they don't belong, nor were they intended by the authors'' In the case of Shakespeare, we really have no way of knowing what he, the author, intended, except through examining the text. (We actually know very little about Shakespeare, the man.) I agree that just because all the roles were acted by men, does not mean that there was a homosexual context to the acting, on the other hand, it doesn't mean there wasn't one either. I don't think ''Julius Caesar's cabal of conspirators was some homosexual love pact'', but I do think there is quite a bit of genderbending in plays like Twelfth Night, contrary to what the article claims. In other examples, was Nancy Drew's tomboy friend George (tall, with short black hair) intended to be a subtle lesbian character, or not? Was Enid Blyton's ''Famous Five'' series's tomboy, also named George (short for Georgina), who dressed like a boy and often passed as one, intended to be a subtle lesbian character? I have no idea. I don't think we should completely discount queer lit theory as a whole - surely it's a possibility that ''some'' of those authors knew exactly what they were implying and did it purposefully? Sorting out which ones, and in which works, is pretty much the idea of queer lit theory, as I understand it. (In addition, there's the whole idea that part of literature is what the author intended, and part is how the text is read by others, which may or may not be the same thing. I wasn't a lit major, so I'm far from an expert at this stuff.) --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 17:20, 15 November 2008 (EST)<br /> ::::: what then of plays like Peter Pan , done in the English Pantomime tradition where the role of Peter is played by a woman ? Is this to be interpreted now as transvestitism ? [[User:Markr|Markr]] 17:48, 15 November 2008 (EST)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Queer_theory&diff=536222 2008-10-14T19:52:33Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>If there is any point to that article beyond promoting gender confusion as pervasive, I don't see it. That certainly doesn't seem like any sort of &quot;conservative&quot; viewpoint to me. It seems rather like liberal propaganda.</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Queer_theory&diff=536221 2008-10-14T19:52:06Z

<p>DavidDeering: New page: If there is any point to that article beyond promoting gender confusion as pervasive, I don't see it. That certainly doesn't seem like any sort of &quot;conservative&quot; viewpoint to me. it seem...</p> <hr /> <div>If there is any point to that article beyond promoting gender confusion as pervasive, I don't see it. That certainly doesn't seem like any sort of &quot;conservative&quot; viewpoint to me. it seems rather like liberal propaganda.</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany&diff=536209 2008-10-14T19:42:13Z

<p>DavidDeering: /* Link error on &quot;Obama didn't write 'Dreams' Ayers did&quot; */</p> <hr /> <div>&lt;noinclude&gt;&lt;center&gt;[[Conservapedia:Desk|Back to the Desk]]&lt;/center&gt;&lt;/noinclude&gt;<br /> =&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;General Messages&lt;/font&gt;=<br /> Archives: [[Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany/Archive1|1]] [[Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany/Archive2|2]] <br /> <br /> == Question about Ten Most Viewed Pages ==<br /> <br /> Your ten most frequently viewed pages includes 9 entries featuring the word &quot;homosexuality.&quot; This seems strange to me, especially as some of the entries are relatively new. Is there a possible alternative explanation for those sites showing up on the Top Ten, besides their popularity? I don't understand much about computers, but, for example, perhaps people have set up computers that repeatedly open up web pages on a particular site, just to skew the numbers?<br /> <br /> Thank you. {{unsigned|Harpers}}<br /> : I don't think the server logs would have that information. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:06, 5 December 2007 (EST)<br /> ::Recommendation: Maybe you guys can track possible abuse using www.sitemeter.com or google analytics? [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 18:54, 11 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> ==Page move request==<br /> Could someone please move [[Ann Widdicombe]] to Ann Widdecombe (correct spelling). [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 13:57, 5 December 2007 (EST)<br /> :Done. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 14:59, 5 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Account Creation suggestion ==<br /> <br /> Although I saw the comment that account creation is only allowed at certain times, it might be a good idea to let potential users know what these times are. It took me several attempts over two days to eventually &quot;strike lucky&quot;. {{unsigned|Unclebill}}<br /> <br /> :I agree. It took me a few times to realise that you could only make an account at certain times during the day. I was trying to find how to make an account last night and gave up. Luckily, I found out an hour or so ago.--[[User:Joel|Joel]] 20:39, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> ::Sorry you both had troubles registering. I'm sure the relevant people will take note of your issue and maybe something will be added to the registration page [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])&lt;/small&gt; 20:45, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> :::Agreed with all of the above, but I'm not sure where the info should be added.<br /> :::*The registration page is (if I recall correctly - my memory is acting up right now...) not accessible when account creation is disabled, so it would be of little use there (&quot;If you can read this, you can register&quot; is amusing, but not terribly helpful :P).<br /> :::*On the Login page, it might look a bit distracting (as the majority of users already has an account, so the info would be of little use for them).<br /> :::Maybe our techies can hack up something to the effect of always having the &quot;Register account&quot; link available, but having it point at a &quot;We're sorry, but account creation is currently disabled. Please try again at X o'clock in timezone Y&quot; page? (I believe we have a Help page to that effect, but I also believe it's not exactly prominently linked for users who are new to the site). --[[User:JakeC|JakeC]] 20:53, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Admin Question ==<br /> <br /> How is it possible to become an Admin to help keep people from being stupid? {{unsigned|Sohsowski}}<br /> :Admins aren't here to do that. Admins carry out essential maintenance of the site. One tip might be: &quot;not to register an account and then throw mud at one's fellow editors&quot; however :) [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])&lt;/small&gt; 20:23, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> ==Logo request==<br /> I'd like to create a link to Conservapedia on my websites. Can you provide a jpg of your logo? {{unsigned|Usmale}}<br /> :[[Image:Conservapedia_logo.png|right|100px]] Current Conservapedia logo - Copyright 2007 Philip Beach --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 15:43, 29 December 2007 (EST)<br /> ::Um... no? It looks similar, but it's definitely different. [http://www.conservapedia.com/skins/common/images/conservlogo.png The actually used file] - different &quot;Trustworthy Encyclopedia&quot; font, and slightly different &quot;Conservapedia&quot; lettering. Can be easily seen when you look at the positions of the &quot;v&quot; and the last &quot;a&quot; in relation to the background. --[[User:JakeC|JakeC]] 17:17, 31 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> ::: Here you go. <br /> ::: [[Image:Conservlogo_logo_highres2.png|thumb|350px|left]]<br /> <br /> [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 20:03, 28 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> {{clear}}<br /> <br /> == Found A Cuss Word ==<br /> <br /> In the Userbox Index, there is a cuss word in a userbox in the uncategorized section.<br /> <br /> It's called User lies and stats <br /> <br /> In your third commandment, your call for family-friendly, clean, concise, and without gossip or foul language pages.<br /> <br /> a kid could easily stumble into it. <br /> <br /> I'm just trying to help Conservapedia.<br /> <br /> '''Edit:'''<br /> <br /> Opps, I didn't realized that I doubled posted, I thought that it didn't make it, sorry. Delete the other one please.<br /> <br /> {{unsigned|EkulR29}}<br /> : I see that Fox has deleted the template, and I've now deleted the link to it in the uncategorised index. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:26, 30 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Confused by this message at my talk page ==<br /> <br /> &quot;Come back next year, when you're serious about helping write encyclopedia articles.&quot;<br /> <br /> I didn't think there was restrictions on creating articles.{{unsigned|User:EkulR29}}<br /> <br /> :I can't speak for why you were blocked, but the &quot;next year&quot; thing was a joke, I think. You were blocked on December 31st for one day, so &quot;next year&quot; would only be one day later. 15:33, 3 January 2008 (EST)<br /> :: You say it was 31st December, but when I look at his page history, it says that the message was left at 09:02 on 1st January, 2008. Of course, that is according to my time zone settings. What time zone is EkulR29 in? Yes, the message has 17:02 on 31st December on it, but at the very least, that could be &quot;confusing&quot;.<br /> :: EkulR29, I suspect that Ed Poor's comment may have been because you have made about 60 edits so far, only four of which were to anything other than this page and your user page. In other words, you seem to be more concerned with telling us about yourself (which is okay in itself) than with actually helping write an encyclopedia.<br /> :: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 18:11, 3 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == How do you? ==<br /> <br /> Ask for a change on a protected page? And is there any way to ask for a page to be unprotected? I imagine any vandalism could be fairly quickly reverted on many pages anyway. [[User:TheEvilSpartan|TheEvilSpartan]] 22:39, 3 January 2008 (EST)<br /> :To ask for a change on a protected page, ask on that page's talk page. To ask for a page to be unprotected, it's best to ask the Administrator who protected it. If that is not practicable, ask another Administrator. If you ask on the page's talk page, the first administrator to notice it could unlock it, but it's possible that nobody will notice for a while. If you ask on an Administrator's talk page, that Administrator should notice very quickly if they are on, or as soon as they next log on, but that might take a day or so (assuming they are not on holidays). If you choose to ask more than one administrator on their talk pages, let them know that you have asked others. Of course, in all such cases, your request might be declined. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:52, 4 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Editing Help ==<br /> <br /> I am having a hard time editing articles. Could you explain me how to go about that process? I'm used to using wikipedia, where they just have an edit button by the text, but here at Conservapedia I can't seem to find the edit button. Please help!<br /> :Same as on this page; third tab from the left at top of article. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:21, 11 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Uploading an images or images ==<br /> <br /> How do I obtain upload privileges? I want to upload a picture on a page.<br /> <br /> Christopher Persaud<br /> <br /> You hang around for a long time until you are trusted with them. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim &lt;small&gt;(CPAdmin1)&lt;/small&gt;]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; [[User:CPAdmin1/Election08|Vote for President]] 15:29, 27 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> Please be more specific. Thanks. {{unsigned|Cperlobo}}<br /> <br /> :If you have a specific image you want to be uploaded then please submit it at [[Conservapedia:Image_upload_requests|image upload request]]. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 17:35, 27 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> : See [[Conservapedia:User rights|User rights]] (Requesting further rights), which is linked from [[Conservapedia:Editor's guide|Editor's guide]] which is in the welcome box on your talk page. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 19:16, 27 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Firefox search bar ==<br /> <br /> I'm not sure what is involved technically, but I use Mozilla Firefox as my internet browser and regularly use the search bar in the top right for Google and Wikipedia searches. Though this search bar recognizes Conservapedia as a possible search engine, Firefox won't allow me to add it as one. The message<br /> Firefox could not download the search plugin from:<br /> http://www.conservapedia.com/opensearch_desc.php<br /> appears. I don't know if this is the correct place to report technical problems (or if you are already aware of this), but I thought I should report it. Is there a reason for this? [[User:Hampshire2600|Hampshire2600]] 20:10 29 January, 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Enlisting College Student Help ==<br /> <br /> I'm a member of a campus conservatives organization, and I think Conservapedia could definitely benefit by enlisting the help of college students to improve the quality of articles, as well as expand Conservapedia's contents. I might recommend creating some sort of program to encourage campus conservative groups to have a part in Conservapedia's development? Thanks! [http://www.honor-bound.org Honorbound Conservatives] [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 19:21, 5 February 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == &quot;In The News ==<br /> <br /> Under &quot;in the news&quot; on the &quot;Main Page&quot; there is this entry:<br /> Liberal denial has begun for NIU killings: &quot;Grad student killer didn't fit the profile,&quot; screams the Associated Press. <br /> In fact, the killer did fit the profile of a public school-trained atheistic: dressed in all black, was an above-average student (at age 27!), and obsessed with self-injury.<br /> <br /> The above entry implies that all people who have attended public school fit the profile of someone who would murder people. This is a woefully inaccurate and unwise statement. There are other ideas I would like to share concerning the inappropriateness this entry, but it I would not want these additional comments to become public.<br /> <br /> {{unsigned|Blazer}}<br /> <br /> == Question about Religion ==<br /> <br /> Hi, I'm an atheist who stumbled upon this website after a friend told me about it. I am a Liberal, and although I disagree with some points you present on this site, one thing I found has truly offended me. In the artible &quot;Examples of Bias in Wikipedia&quot;, the page begins with a graph showing the number of Wikipedia users by religion. It shows a large amount atheists compared to other religions. First of all, I read this as being considered a &quot;problem&quot;, and I would like to know why. Secondly, I assume from the &quot;Daily Bible Verse&quot; that an overwhelming amount of Conservapedia users are Christians. Is that better? I assure you I'm not here to stir up a controversy, I'm just puzzled and would like a straight answer. [[User:VonShroom|VonShroom]] 19:59, 23 February 2008 (EST)<br /> :Perhaps the graph needs more explanation, but (not having put it there myself), I'd say that it's to illustrate the cause of much of the bias, with the number of atheists editing on Wikipedia being quite out of proportion of the number of atheists in society. Yes, a large proportion of Conservapedia users are Christians. This is more in proportion with their representation in society, particularly American society (where most of the editors would be from) and even if this were not so, Conservapedia is explicitly conservative, not neutral, as Wikipedia ''claims'' to be. Furthermore, I would claim that Christianity is the only true religion. People of other religions, including atheism, disagree, of course, but in most cases consider ''their'' religion to be the only correct one, so Christians are not alone in believing their religion to be correct. Atheists often claim that we shouldn't claim to be the correct religion because we can't know for sure, or they are ''all'' subjective, or some similar reasoning, but rarely substantiate this claim, and usually exempt their own beliefs from this statement on the self-serving grounds that atheism is not a religion (if you think that way, please read the [[Religion]] article). [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:47, 24 February 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == UKIP ==<br /> <br /> The current article on UKIP is a direct copy from Wikipedia. Administrators/sysops might care to check this and take appropriate action [[User:Koba|Koba]] 11:13, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> :I've reverted it and given the editor a 1-day block. Repeats will be dealt with more severely. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 11:15, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> ::You don't waste much time - I hadn't even finished writing my first message! [[User:Koba|Koba]] 11:17, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> :::I'm watching recent changes as I listen to the sport on TV so I spotted the plagiarism before I saw your message. It's always a big giveaway when the text is riddled with red-links and calls to templates that we don't have here. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 11:21, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Grammatical errors ==<br /> <br /> Hi,<br /> I just looked up Palestine in Conservapedia and found two errors in the first few lines. Do you have editing and correcting capability? I love the idea of this website to combat the terrible Wikipedia, but to be taken seriously you must have a way to correct grammatical errors and awkward sentences. Otherwise, people won't use the website for reference.<br /> Thanks,<br /> Barb<br /> bhhawley4@gmail.com<br /> <br /> :Yes, when you go to most pages there is an &quot;edit&quot; tab at the top. Please correct our grammar and sentence structure if you see something that needs work! It's rare, but we sometimes make mistakes ;-) [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:39, 25 March 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == A Call For Conservapedia's Rise to Activism ==<br /> <br /> While the left continues to deride just about any effort the right makes to build a solid knowledgebase on the web, I saw in Conservapedia from its earliest days an opportunity to really build a powerhouse of information. In today's age of information warfare (between corporations, nation-states, and political organizations), managing vasts amounts of information has now become key in gaining the upper hand in any dispute. <br /> <br /> I confess, I'm merely a small fish among thousands here, so I have no idea what major priorities the admins of this site are currently working on. Does Conservapedia have plans to become a powerful political tool for serious students and leaders within the conservative movement, or is it just a hobby? Think about it: there exists no alternative general conservative knowledgebase out there. Conservapedia is the only major conservative wiki (that I know of) that can fill a great need within the conservative movement. But I'm not sure that we're using this opportunity toward having an immediate impact on the world of politics today. <br /> <br /> I say this, because anytime there's a news article or editorial that comes up, I like to look up the political background and information behind people and organizations. And unless the personality is unavoidably famous, my searches on this site turn up nothing. Maybe this is because much of what Conservapedia focuses on are broad issues, categories, scientific and religious doctrine rather than the current big players in today's world? <br /> <br /> Consider that this is an election year. In political terms, we are now in a state of war, and the battle is about go nuclear once the Democrats crawl their way out of the mess they're in. But you wouldn't know it when you look at the most recent edits on this site. With so many registered users, why isn't there a concerted effort to dig up and record every detail of each candidate's career and policies? There are literally hundreds of conservative blogs out there recording precious intel that could be of great use to someone looking for a central location to find all that info. But much of the info you see here on [[Obama]], for example, is mostly biographical.<br /> <br /> I may be way off base in posting all of this, but I'm wondering, are there any plans like I'm describing already underway, or is this just beyond Conservapeida's priorities at this time? [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 22:33, 31 March 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> : We welcome suggestions and criticisms but, frankly, I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Your only example is our [[Obama]] entry, which you complain is &quot;mostly biographical.&quot; But what else would one expect about a political candidate, particularly one who has no clear beliefs of his own? <br /> <br /> : As to the supposedly great conservative blogs, I'm not sure what &quot;precious intel&quot; they are conveying that isn't in our entries. If you're referencing gossip, that's not going to make a difference and we're not going to waste time on it.<br /> <br /> : We welcome your contributions, and perhaps in reviewing those we can learn what you have in mind. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 31 March 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ::[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], the kinds of &quot;blogs&quot; I consider to be higher quality are [http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com littlegreenfootballs.com], [http://www.hotair.com hotair.com], and so on. These, I consider to be semi-reliable sources of cutting edge news, and they come out daily with useful information that would be handy in debates about the current Democratic candidates. If we think of an Conservapedia as an ocean of archived knowledge, then such news blogs can be endless fountainstreams of new information. All of us, who have been following the election process closely will easily recall many of the reasons why, for example, Barack Obama would be a terrible president. From the Reverend Wright comments, to his most recent remark about &quot;clinging to guns or religion,&quot; to even more recent uncoverings of his promises to abortion lobbyists: &quot;Well, the first thing I'd do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.&quot; But a couple of years from now, few of us will remember those important details to pass down to those who come after us. <br /> <br /> ::You can be sure Obama will continue to paint himself as someone who can &quot;trascend party lines,&quot; but everything about the man's ''political'' (as opposed to merely ''biographical'') history paints a very different picture. In short, suppose Conservapedia were developed into an information war machine, where most efforts during the election season would be used to collect the newest and latest information that would be useful for sustaining the conservative movement? I hope I'm making sense. [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 14:55, 14 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> <br /> : I might be a touch at odds with Aschlafly's aims here, but one problem I have with your (Alexander's) post is that it appears very American-centric. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:05, 1 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]], I don't mean to offend your sensibilities by focusing my earlier remarks toward an exclusively American audience. I acknowledge we Yanks have like-minded friends in other countries, but the reason for my message being tailored to U.S. citizens is because ours happens to be the one nation currently embroiled in a very hotly contested election season, where the future of conservative values is at stake. Additionally, one might well accuse this entire web site of being American-centric... just look at the logo! [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 14:55, 14 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Question ==<br /> <br /> I saw up above that it's ok to copy things if you wrote them yourself. What if you didn't write them yourself, but the information is entirely accurate and you give sources? Like Wikipedia's stuff on math is really good and I'd like to work on that (as a place to start!), but if we can't use that stuff, then I'll start from scratch. [[User:OhioChris|OhioChris]] 12:40, 1 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :You can use their sources as a starting point, but our copyright clauses are incompatable so you can not actually copy the text itself. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 12:42, 1 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Kind of funny ==<br /> <br /> This site is kind of funny, and it's rather nicely done to be convincing that it's serious, I especially like the American flag logo thingy, that's hilarious, but it's still somewhat lacking, are there any really amusing articles here? [[User:Frank88|Frank88]] 23:38, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> :An American flag logo is hilarious? Nevertheless, I'm glad we have brightened up your day. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 23:40, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> ::Well ya, in its context, as an ironic symbol of conservatism, also the way it's displayed as Americans tend to do as if it's a symbol of greatness, it's a good parody. [[User:Frank88|Frank88]] 23:48, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> :::Okay, whatever. Please familiarize yourself with the [[Conservapedia Commandments]] before editing. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 23:51, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> ::::Oh, I was hoping those would be funnier, I don't really like uncyclopedia, but this site has the potential to be funnier. [[User:Frank88|Frank88]] 23:55, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Website search option ==<br /> <br /> Hello,<br /> Please move the search box higher on the page, so when you open Conservapedia you can type into the Search box without having to scroll down to find it. I can't imagine why the search box is so low on the page that you have to scroll down.<br /> <br /> Also, It's difficult to find a link to contact Conservapedia! Phew! You should make it easier to contact you with questions.<br /> <br /> I love Conservapedia and I hope it becomes MUCH bigger than Wikipedia!<br /> <br /> Thank you,<br /> Barb<br /> : I agree that it's a problem, and I've looked before into changing it. There appears to be only two ways to do so. One is simply to reduce the size of the menus above it (which means eliminating some entries) and the other (although I'm not certain about this one) is to put it above &quot;master control&quot;. In other words, it's not possible to put it between &quot;master control&quot; and &quot;help&quot; or between &quot;help&quot; and &quot;supreme court&quot;. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:55, 13 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Front page ==<br /> <br /> El que se sieta como rey en los cielos se rie, El Senor se burla de ellos! (Translated to English: He who sits in the heavens laughs, the Lord scoffs at them!). It should read &quot;El que se '''''sienta'''''.... I would just like a project that I'm going to work on to not have an error on the front page. It on the part about castro. An accent should also be above the &quot;E&quot; in &quot;El&quot;.Thanks--[[User:Die4Dixie|Die4Dixie]] 17:48, 23 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Trouble editing some pages ==<br /> <br /> I noticed several duplicate Supreme Court Case articles, so I tried to turn the shorter versions of them into redirects. However, my changes are not being shown. This is especially strange because if you hit &quot;edit&quot; it shows my changes, but the actually article does not. <br /> <br /> Here are the articles I am having trouble with:<br /> <br /> [[Alyeska Pipeline Serv. Co. v. Wilderness Soc'y]]<br /> <br /> [[CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Georgia State Board of Equalization]]<br /> <br /> [[Dred Scott v. Sanford]]<br /> <br /> I apologize if these mistakes are somehow my fault. '''[[user:FernoKlump | &lt;font color=&quot;#004080&quot; &gt;FernoKlump&lt;/font&gt;]]''' 20:26, 29 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :Hmm, nevermind. Whatever the problem was it seems to be fixed now. '''[[user:FernoKlump | &lt;font color=&quot;#004080&quot; &gt;FernoKlump&lt;/font&gt;]]''' 20:36, 29 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Protecting titles of deleted articles ==<br /> <br /> There are a lot of titles in [[Special:Allpages]] that aren't family friendly. Now that you have a new version of MediaWiki installed, you should use the protected titles functionality, as shown in [[Special:Protectedtitles]], instead of redirecting to [[Conservapedia:Deletedpage]]. That way, they won't show up in the index. [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Protected_titles This link] at mediawiki.org gives more information. --[[User:Elkman|Elkman]] 23:28, 16 June 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Web problems ==<br /> <br /> Is there some kind of problem with the CP server? When I click on a link in the site lately, I get a &quot;cannot display the webpage&quot; message, and I have to go back and try again, sometimes 3 or 4 times, before I get to the page I want. This even happens when I submit edits. I don't think it's a a problem with my computer because all non-CP webpages load with no problem. Has anyone else noticed this?--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 18:30, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> Happens to me about 80% of the time. So frustrating! And it's definitely happening to other people, I've seen it mentioned.--[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 20:57, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> As if August 2, it's been completely smooth sailing for three days or so. Whoever fixed it, thanks.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 17:30, 2 August 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Photon ==<br /> <br /> This page has been heavily vandalized with some sort of HTML script (I think, I'm not really an expert.)<br /> I don't know to fix it, so could someone with a bit of computer know-how go in and sort it out?<br /> :It's a problem with the &quot;jargon&quot; tag. I've edited the tag out of that article for now. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 09:59, 31 July 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Personal edit counter ==<br /> <br /> My personal edit counter shows zero, even though I have added at least 5 external links, various quotes, and created a new article. Why?--[[User:American78|American78]] 10:22, 7 September 2008 (EDT)<br /> : The edit counter is broken, but its author intends to fix it when he gets a chance. See [[User talk:Interiot#Edit count tool|here]]. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:36, 7 September 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == &quot;Encyclopedia&quot; ==<br /> I had hoped to find an addess to email directly but this was not readily available on the website. I simply wish to voice my displeaseure with your use of the word &quot;encyclopedia&quot;. You are providing information which is clearly biased and the word &quot;encyclopedia&quot; is not appropriately used. This is simply my opinion and I feel compelled to voice my opposition to your use of the term in conjunction with the articles posted on this site. {{unsigned|Martinlaw}}<br /> : Show me an encyclopaedia that is not biased. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:28, 29 September 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Contact ==<br /> I keep getting blocked and there is no way to contact anyone! I've searched high and low for months, there is no way to contact anyone. I haven't violated any rules that are stated anywhere! {{unsigned|BrendanW}}<br /> : You've been answered elsewhere, but to put an answer here, if you have your e-mail enabled (as required), then there are a number of the administrators you can e-mail with the &quot;E-mail this user&quot; link. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:11, 7 October 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Link error on &quot;Obama didn't write 'Dreams' Ayers did&quot; ==<br /> <br /> The link for the; &quot;Obama didn't write 'Dreams' Ayers did&quot;; story should be<br /> <br /> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=77815<br /> <br /> --I see this has now been corrected.</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany&diff=536187 2008-10-14T18:40:09Z

<p>DavidDeering: /* Link error on &quot;Obama didn't write 'Dreams' Ayers did&quot; */ new section</p> <hr /> <div>&lt;noinclude&gt;&lt;center&gt;[[Conservapedia:Desk|Back to the Desk]]&lt;/center&gt;&lt;/noinclude&gt;<br /> =&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;General Messages&lt;/font&gt;=<br /> Archives: [[Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany/Archive1|1]] [[Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany/Archive2|2]] <br /> <br /> == Question about Ten Most Viewed Pages ==<br /> <br /> Your ten most frequently viewed pages includes 9 entries featuring the word &quot;homosexuality.&quot; This seems strange to me, especially as some of the entries are relatively new. Is there a possible alternative explanation for those sites showing up on the Top Ten, besides their popularity? I don't understand much about computers, but, for example, perhaps people have set up computers that repeatedly open up web pages on a particular site, just to skew the numbers?<br /> <br /> Thank you. {{unsigned|Harpers}}<br /> : I don't think the server logs would have that information. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:06, 5 December 2007 (EST)<br /> ::Recommendation: Maybe you guys can track possible abuse using www.sitemeter.com or google analytics? [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 18:54, 11 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> ==Page move request==<br /> Could someone please move [[Ann Widdicombe]] to Ann Widdecombe (correct spelling). [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 13:57, 5 December 2007 (EST)<br /> :Done. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 14:59, 5 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Account Creation suggestion ==<br /> <br /> Although I saw the comment that account creation is only allowed at certain times, it might be a good idea to let potential users know what these times are. It took me several attempts over two days to eventually &quot;strike lucky&quot;. {{unsigned|Unclebill}}<br /> <br /> :I agree. It took me a few times to realise that you could only make an account at certain times during the day. I was trying to find how to make an account last night and gave up. Luckily, I found out an hour or so ago.--[[User:Joel|Joel]] 20:39, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> ::Sorry you both had troubles registering. I'm sure the relevant people will take note of your issue and maybe something will be added to the registration page [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])&lt;/small&gt; 20:45, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> :::Agreed with all of the above, but I'm not sure where the info should be added.<br /> :::*The registration page is (if I recall correctly - my memory is acting up right now...) not accessible when account creation is disabled, so it would be of little use there (&quot;If you can read this, you can register&quot; is amusing, but not terribly helpful :P).<br /> :::*On the Login page, it might look a bit distracting (as the majority of users already has an account, so the info would be of little use for them).<br /> :::Maybe our techies can hack up something to the effect of always having the &quot;Register account&quot; link available, but having it point at a &quot;We're sorry, but account creation is currently disabled. Please try again at X o'clock in timezone Y&quot; page? (I believe we have a Help page to that effect, but I also believe it's not exactly prominently linked for users who are new to the site). --[[User:JakeC|JakeC]] 20:53, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Admin Question ==<br /> <br /> How is it possible to become an Admin to help keep people from being stupid? {{unsigned|Sohsowski}}<br /> :Admins aren't here to do that. Admins carry out essential maintenance of the site. One tip might be: &quot;not to register an account and then throw mud at one's fellow editors&quot; however :) [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])&lt;/small&gt; 20:23, 25 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> ==Logo request==<br /> I'd like to create a link to Conservapedia on my websites. Can you provide a jpg of your logo? {{unsigned|Usmale}}<br /> :[[Image:Conservapedia_logo.png|right|100px]] Current Conservapedia logo - Copyright 2007 Philip Beach --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 15:43, 29 December 2007 (EST)<br /> ::Um... no? It looks similar, but it's definitely different. [http://www.conservapedia.com/skins/common/images/conservlogo.png The actually used file] - different &quot;Trustworthy Encyclopedia&quot; font, and slightly different &quot;Conservapedia&quot; lettering. Can be easily seen when you look at the positions of the &quot;v&quot; and the last &quot;a&quot; in relation to the background. --[[User:JakeC|JakeC]] 17:17, 31 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> ::: Here you go. <br /> ::: [[Image:Conservlogo_logo_highres2.png|thumb|350px|left]]<br /> <br /> [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 20:03, 28 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> {{clear}}<br /> <br /> == Found A Cuss Word ==<br /> <br /> In the Userbox Index, there is a cuss word in a userbox in the uncategorized section.<br /> <br /> It's called User lies and stats <br /> <br /> In your third commandment, your call for family-friendly, clean, concise, and without gossip or foul language pages.<br /> <br /> a kid could easily stumble into it. <br /> <br /> I'm just trying to help Conservapedia.<br /> <br /> '''Edit:'''<br /> <br /> Opps, I didn't realized that I doubled posted, I thought that it didn't make it, sorry. Delete the other one please.<br /> <br /> {{unsigned|EkulR29}}<br /> : I see that Fox has deleted the template, and I've now deleted the link to it in the uncategorised index. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:26, 30 December 2007 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Confused by this message at my talk page ==<br /> <br /> &quot;Come back next year, when you're serious about helping write encyclopedia articles.&quot;<br /> <br /> I didn't think there was restrictions on creating articles.{{unsigned|User:EkulR29}}<br /> <br /> :I can't speak for why you were blocked, but the &quot;next year&quot; thing was a joke, I think. You were blocked on December 31st for one day, so &quot;next year&quot; would only be one day later. 15:33, 3 January 2008 (EST)<br /> :: You say it was 31st December, but when I look at his page history, it says that the message was left at 09:02 on 1st January, 2008. Of course, that is according to my time zone settings. What time zone is EkulR29 in? Yes, the message has 17:02 on 31st December on it, but at the very least, that could be &quot;confusing&quot;.<br /> :: EkulR29, I suspect that Ed Poor's comment may have been because you have made about 60 edits so far, only four of which were to anything other than this page and your user page. In other words, you seem to be more concerned with telling us about yourself (which is okay in itself) than with actually helping write an encyclopedia.<br /> :: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 18:11, 3 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == How do you? ==<br /> <br /> Ask for a change on a protected page? And is there any way to ask for a page to be unprotected? I imagine any vandalism could be fairly quickly reverted on many pages anyway. [[User:TheEvilSpartan|TheEvilSpartan]] 22:39, 3 January 2008 (EST)<br /> :To ask for a change on a protected page, ask on that page's talk page. To ask for a page to be unprotected, it's best to ask the Administrator who protected it. If that is not practicable, ask another Administrator. If you ask on the page's talk page, the first administrator to notice it could unlock it, but it's possible that nobody will notice for a while. If you ask on an Administrator's talk page, that Administrator should notice very quickly if they are on, or as soon as they next log on, but that might take a day or so (assuming they are not on holidays). If you choose to ask more than one administrator on their talk pages, let them know that you have asked others. Of course, in all such cases, your request might be declined. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:52, 4 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Editing Help ==<br /> <br /> I am having a hard time editing articles. Could you explain me how to go about that process? I'm used to using wikipedia, where they just have an edit button by the text, but here at Conservapedia I can't seem to find the edit button. Please help!<br /> :Same as on this page; third tab from the left at top of article. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] &lt;small&gt;([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])&lt;/small&gt; 21:21, 11 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Uploading an images or images ==<br /> <br /> How do I obtain upload privileges? I want to upload a picture on a page.<br /> <br /> Christopher Persaud<br /> <br /> You hang around for a long time until you are trusted with them. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim &lt;small&gt;(CPAdmin1)&lt;/small&gt;]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; [[User:CPAdmin1/Election08|Vote for President]] 15:29, 27 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> Please be more specific. Thanks. {{unsigned|Cperlobo}}<br /> <br /> :If you have a specific image you want to be uploaded then please submit it at [[Conservapedia:Image_upload_requests|image upload request]]. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 17:35, 27 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> : See [[Conservapedia:User rights|User rights]] (Requesting further rights), which is linked from [[Conservapedia:Editor's guide|Editor's guide]] which is in the welcome box on your talk page. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 19:16, 27 January 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Firefox search bar ==<br /> <br /> I'm not sure what is involved technically, but I use Mozilla Firefox as my internet browser and regularly use the search bar in the top right for Google and Wikipedia searches. Though this search bar recognizes Conservapedia as a possible search engine, Firefox won't allow me to add it as one. The message<br /> Firefox could not download the search plugin from:<br /> http://www.conservapedia.com/opensearch_desc.php<br /> appears. I don't know if this is the correct place to report technical problems (or if you are already aware of this), but I thought I should report it. Is there a reason for this? [[User:Hampshire2600|Hampshire2600]] 20:10 29 January, 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Enlisting College Student Help ==<br /> <br /> I'm a member of a campus conservatives organization, and I think Conservapedia could definitely benefit by enlisting the help of college students to improve the quality of articles, as well as expand Conservapedia's contents. I might recommend creating some sort of program to encourage campus conservative groups to have a part in Conservapedia's development? Thanks! [http://www.honor-bound.org Honorbound Conservatives] [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 19:21, 5 February 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == &quot;In The News ==<br /> <br /> Under &quot;in the news&quot; on the &quot;Main Page&quot; there is this entry:<br /> Liberal denial has begun for NIU killings: &quot;Grad student killer didn't fit the profile,&quot; screams the Associated Press. <br /> In fact, the killer did fit the profile of a public school-trained atheistic: dressed in all black, was an above-average student (at age 27!), and obsessed with self-injury.<br /> <br /> The above entry implies that all people who have attended public school fit the profile of someone who would murder people. This is a woefully inaccurate and unwise statement. There are other ideas I would like to share concerning the inappropriateness this entry, but it I would not want these additional comments to become public.<br /> <br /> {{unsigned|Blazer}}<br /> <br /> == Question about Religion ==<br /> <br /> Hi, I'm an atheist who stumbled upon this website after a friend told me about it. I am a Liberal, and although I disagree with some points you present on this site, one thing I found has truly offended me. In the artible &quot;Examples of Bias in Wikipedia&quot;, the page begins with a graph showing the number of Wikipedia users by religion. It shows a large amount atheists compared to other religions. First of all, I read this as being considered a &quot;problem&quot;, and I would like to know why. Secondly, I assume from the &quot;Daily Bible Verse&quot; that an overwhelming amount of Conservapedia users are Christians. Is that better? I assure you I'm not here to stir up a controversy, I'm just puzzled and would like a straight answer. [[User:VonShroom|VonShroom]] 19:59, 23 February 2008 (EST)<br /> :Perhaps the graph needs more explanation, but (not having put it there myself), I'd say that it's to illustrate the cause of much of the bias, with the number of atheists editing on Wikipedia being quite out of proportion of the number of atheists in society. Yes, a large proportion of Conservapedia users are Christians. This is more in proportion with their representation in society, particularly American society (where most of the editors would be from) and even if this were not so, Conservapedia is explicitly conservative, not neutral, as Wikipedia ''claims'' to be. Furthermore, I would claim that Christianity is the only true religion. People of other religions, including atheism, disagree, of course, but in most cases consider ''their'' religion to be the only correct one, so Christians are not alone in believing their religion to be correct. Atheists often claim that we shouldn't claim to be the correct religion because we can't know for sure, or they are ''all'' subjective, or some similar reasoning, but rarely substantiate this claim, and usually exempt their own beliefs from this statement on the self-serving grounds that atheism is not a religion (if you think that way, please read the [[Religion]] article). [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:47, 24 February 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == UKIP ==<br /> <br /> The current article on UKIP is a direct copy from Wikipedia. Administrators/sysops might care to check this and take appropriate action [[User:Koba|Koba]] 11:13, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> :I've reverted it and given the editor a 1-day block. Repeats will be dealt with more severely. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 11:15, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> ::You don't waste much time - I hadn't even finished writing my first message! [[User:Koba|Koba]] 11:17, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> :::I'm watching recent changes as I listen to the sport on TV so I spotted the plagiarism before I saw your message. It's always a big giveaway when the text is riddled with red-links and calls to templates that we don't have here. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 11:21, 1 March 2008 (EST)<br /> <br /> == Grammatical errors ==<br /> <br /> Hi,<br /> I just looked up Palestine in Conservapedia and found two errors in the first few lines. Do you have editing and correcting capability? I love the idea of this website to combat the terrible Wikipedia, but to be taken seriously you must have a way to correct grammatical errors and awkward sentences. Otherwise, people won't use the website for reference.<br /> Thanks,<br /> Barb<br /> bhhawley4@gmail.com<br /> <br /> :Yes, when you go to most pages there is an &quot;edit&quot; tab at the top. Please correct our grammar and sentence structure if you see something that needs work! It's rare, but we sometimes make mistakes ;-) [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:39, 25 March 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == A Call For Conservapedia's Rise to Activism ==<br /> <br /> While the left continues to deride just about any effort the right makes to build a solid knowledgebase on the web, I saw in Conservapedia from its earliest days an opportunity to really build a powerhouse of information. In today's age of information warfare (between corporations, nation-states, and political organizations), managing vasts amounts of information has now become key in gaining the upper hand in any dispute. <br /> <br /> I confess, I'm merely a small fish among thousands here, so I have no idea what major priorities the admins of this site are currently working on. Does Conservapedia have plans to become a powerful political tool for serious students and leaders within the conservative movement, or is it just a hobby? Think about it: there exists no alternative general conservative knowledgebase out there. Conservapedia is the only major conservative wiki (that I know of) that can fill a great need within the conservative movement. But I'm not sure that we're using this opportunity toward having an immediate impact on the world of politics today. <br /> <br /> I say this, because anytime there's a news article or editorial that comes up, I like to look up the political background and information behind people and organizations. And unless the personality is unavoidably famous, my searches on this site turn up nothing. Maybe this is because much of what Conservapedia focuses on are broad issues, categories, scientific and religious doctrine rather than the current big players in today's world? <br /> <br /> Consider that this is an election year. In political terms, we are now in a state of war, and the battle is about go nuclear once the Democrats crawl their way out of the mess they're in. But you wouldn't know it when you look at the most recent edits on this site. With so many registered users, why isn't there a concerted effort to dig up and record every detail of each candidate's career and policies? There are literally hundreds of conservative blogs out there recording precious intel that could be of great use to someone looking for a central location to find all that info. But much of the info you see here on [[Obama]], for example, is mostly biographical.<br /> <br /> I may be way off base in posting all of this, but I'm wondering, are there any plans like I'm describing already underway, or is this just beyond Conservapeida's priorities at this time? [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 22:33, 31 March 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> : We welcome suggestions and criticisms but, frankly, I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Your only example is our [[Obama]] entry, which you complain is &quot;mostly biographical.&quot; But what else would one expect about a political candidate, particularly one who has no clear beliefs of his own? <br /> <br /> : As to the supposedly great conservative blogs, I'm not sure what &quot;precious intel&quot; they are conveying that isn't in our entries. If you're referencing gossip, that's not going to make a difference and we're not going to waste time on it.<br /> <br /> : We welcome your contributions, and perhaps in reviewing those we can learn what you have in mind. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 31 March 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ::[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], the kinds of &quot;blogs&quot; I consider to be higher quality are [http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com littlegreenfootballs.com], [http://www.hotair.com hotair.com], and so on. These, I consider to be semi-reliable sources of cutting edge news, and they come out daily with useful information that would be handy in debates about the current Democratic candidates. If we think of an Conservapedia as an ocean of archived knowledge, then such news blogs can be endless fountainstreams of new information. All of us, who have been following the election process closely will easily recall many of the reasons why, for example, Barack Obama would be a terrible president. From the Reverend Wright comments, to his most recent remark about &quot;clinging to guns or religion,&quot; to even more recent uncoverings of his promises to abortion lobbyists: &quot;Well, the first thing I'd do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.&quot; But a couple of years from now, few of us will remember those important details to pass down to those who come after us. <br /> <br /> ::You can be sure Obama will continue to paint himself as someone who can &quot;trascend party lines,&quot; but everything about the man's ''political'' (as opposed to merely ''biographical'') history paints a very different picture. In short, suppose Conservapedia were developed into an information war machine, where most efforts during the election season would be used to collect the newest and latest information that would be useful for sustaining the conservative movement? I hope I'm making sense. [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 14:55, 14 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> <br /> : I might be a touch at odds with Aschlafly's aims here, but one problem I have with your (Alexander's) post is that it appears very American-centric. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:05, 1 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]], I don't mean to offend your sensibilities by focusing my earlier remarks toward an exclusively American audience. I acknowledge we Yanks have like-minded friends in other countries, but the reason for my message being tailored to U.S. citizens is because ours happens to be the one nation currently embroiled in a very hotly contested election season, where the future of conservative values is at stake. Additionally, one might well accuse this entire web site of being American-centric... just look at the logo! [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 14:55, 14 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Question ==<br /> <br /> I saw up above that it's ok to copy things if you wrote them yourself. What if you didn't write them yourself, but the information is entirely accurate and you give sources? Like Wikipedia's stuff on math is really good and I'd like to work on that (as a place to start!), but if we can't use that stuff, then I'll start from scratch. [[User:OhioChris|OhioChris]] 12:40, 1 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :You can use their sources as a starting point, but our copyright clauses are incompatable so you can not actually copy the text itself. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 12:42, 1 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Kind of funny ==<br /> <br /> This site is kind of funny, and it's rather nicely done to be convincing that it's serious, I especially like the American flag logo thingy, that's hilarious, but it's still somewhat lacking, are there any really amusing articles here? [[User:Frank88|Frank88]] 23:38, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> :An American flag logo is hilarious? Nevertheless, I'm glad we have brightened up your day. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 23:40, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> ::Well ya, in its context, as an ironic symbol of conservatism, also the way it's displayed as Americans tend to do as if it's a symbol of greatness, it's a good parody. [[User:Frank88|Frank88]] 23:48, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> :::Okay, whatever. Please familiarize yourself with the [[Conservapedia Commandments]] before editing. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 23:51, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> ::::Oh, I was hoping those would be funnier, I don't really like uncyclopedia, but this site has the potential to be funnier. [[User:Frank88|Frank88]] 23:55, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Website search option ==<br /> <br /> Hello,<br /> Please move the search box higher on the page, so when you open Conservapedia you can type into the Search box without having to scroll down to find it. I can't imagine why the search box is so low on the page that you have to scroll down.<br /> <br /> Also, It's difficult to find a link to contact Conservapedia! Phew! You should make it easier to contact you with questions.<br /> <br /> I love Conservapedia and I hope it becomes MUCH bigger than Wikipedia!<br /> <br /> Thank you,<br /> Barb<br /> : I agree that it's a problem, and I've looked before into changing it. There appears to be only two ways to do so. One is simply to reduce the size of the menus above it (which means eliminating some entries) and the other (although I'm not certain about this one) is to put it above &quot;master control&quot;. In other words, it's not possible to put it between &quot;master control&quot; and &quot;help&quot; or between &quot;help&quot; and &quot;supreme court&quot;. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:55, 13 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Front page ==<br /> <br /> El que se sieta como rey en los cielos se rie, El Senor se burla de ellos! (Translated to English: He who sits in the heavens laughs, the Lord scoffs at them!). It should read &quot;El que se '''''sienta'''''.... I would just like a project that I'm going to work on to not have an error on the front page. It on the part about castro. An accent should also be above the &quot;E&quot; in &quot;El&quot;.Thanks--[[User:Die4Dixie|Die4Dixie]] 17:48, 23 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Trouble editing some pages ==<br /> <br /> I noticed several duplicate Supreme Court Case articles, so I tried to turn the shorter versions of them into redirects. However, my changes are not being shown. This is especially strange because if you hit &quot;edit&quot; it shows my changes, but the actually article does not. <br /> <br /> Here are the articles I am having trouble with:<br /> <br /> [[Alyeska Pipeline Serv. Co. v. Wilderness Soc'y]]<br /> <br /> [[CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Georgia State Board of Equalization]]<br /> <br /> [[Dred Scott v. Sanford]]<br /> <br /> I apologize if these mistakes are somehow my fault. '''[[user:FernoKlump | &lt;font color=&quot;#004080&quot; &gt;FernoKlump&lt;/font&gt;]]''' 20:26, 29 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> :Hmm, nevermind. Whatever the problem was it seems to be fixed now. '''[[user:FernoKlump | &lt;font color=&quot;#004080&quot; &gt;FernoKlump&lt;/font&gt;]]''' 20:36, 29 April 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Protecting titles of deleted articles ==<br /> <br /> There are a lot of titles in [[Special:Allpages]] that aren't family friendly. Now that you have a new version of MediaWiki installed, you should use the protected titles functionality, as shown in [[Special:Protectedtitles]], instead of redirecting to [[Conservapedia:Deletedpage]]. That way, they won't show up in the index. [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Protected_titles This link] at mediawiki.org gives more information. --[[User:Elkman|Elkman]] 23:28, 16 June 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Web problems ==<br /> <br /> Is there some kind of problem with the CP server? When I click on a link in the site lately, I get a &quot;cannot display the webpage&quot; message, and I have to go back and try again, sometimes 3 or 4 times, before I get to the page I want. This even happens when I submit edits. I don't think it's a a problem with my computer because all non-CP webpages load with no problem. Has anyone else noticed this?--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 18:30, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> Happens to me about 80% of the time. So frustrating! And it's definitely happening to other people, I've seen it mentioned.--[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 20:57, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> As if August 2, it's been completely smooth sailing for three days or so. Whoever fixed it, thanks.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 17:30, 2 August 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Photon ==<br /> <br /> This page has been heavily vandalized with some sort of HTML script (I think, I'm not really an expert.)<br /> I don't know to fix it, so could someone with a bit of computer know-how go in and sort it out?<br /> :It's a problem with the &quot;jargon&quot; tag. I've edited the tag out of that article for now. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 09:59, 31 July 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Personal edit counter ==<br /> <br /> My personal edit counter shows zero, even though I have added at least 5 external links, various quotes, and created a new article. Why?--[[User:American78|American78]] 10:22, 7 September 2008 (EDT)<br /> : The edit counter is broken, but its author intends to fix it when he gets a chance. See [[User talk:Interiot#Edit count tool|here]]. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:36, 7 September 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == &quot;Encyclopedia&quot; ==<br /> I had hoped to find an addess to email directly but this was not readily available on the website. I simply wish to voice my displeaseure with your use of the word &quot;encyclopedia&quot;. You are providing information which is clearly biased and the word &quot;encyclopedia&quot; is not appropriately used. This is simply my opinion and I feel compelled to voice my opposition to your use of the term in conjunction with the articles posted on this site. {{unsigned|Martinlaw}}<br /> : Show me an encyclopaedia that is not biased. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:28, 29 September 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Contact ==<br /> I keep getting blocked and there is no way to contact anyone! I've searched high and low for months, there is no way to contact anyone. I haven't violated any rules that are stated anywhere! {{unsigned|BrendanW}}<br /> : You've been answered elsewhere, but to put an answer here, if you have your e-mail enabled (as required), then there are a number of the administrators you can e-mail with the &quot;E-mail this user&quot; link. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:11, 7 October 2008 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Link error on &quot;Obama didn't write 'Dreams' Ayers did&quot; ==<br /> <br /> The link for the; &quot;Obama didn't write 'Dreams' Ayers did&quot;; story should be<br /> <br /> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=77815<br /> <br /> and not http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=77815<br /> <br /> which redirects to<br /> http://www.truthout.org/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=77815<br /> <br /> and seems to be a VERY LIBERAL blog.</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Baptism&diff=340182 2007-11-20T17:51:06Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>'''Baptism''' refers to the [[sacrament]] of initiation in the [[Catholic]] Church and [[Orthodox Church]] traditions, considered to be necessary for salvation in accordance with Jesus' teaching in John 3:5 '''Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'''. Because of this, infants are baptized a few weeks after being born. In the Catholic ritual, water is poured over the head of the child while the priest repeats the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19, &quot;I baptize you (name) in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.&quot; Adult converts to Catholicism are immersed in water for baptism during Easter vigil.<br /> <br /> In some Protestant churches, the water in John 3:5 is assumed to be the waters of birth and being born again refers to spiritual renewal. Thus baptism becomes an ordinance performed after conversion. Significance and mode of baptism remain controversial subjects among evangelical Protestant Christians.<br /> <br /> In the Reformed tradition, [[Presbyterian]] and others that hold to the [[Westminster Confession of Faith]], baptism is rightly administered to believing adults and the children of a believer, for a public confession and as a sign and seal of God's Covenant of [[Grace]]. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;&gt; The Westminster Confession of Faith for study classes by G.I.Williamson, 1964, pp207ff &lt;/ref&gt; It is properly administered by dipping, sprinkling or pouring, but is not essential for salvation. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;/&gt; Prominent past theologians have taught this doctrine such as John Calvin &lt;ref&gt; Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, 1536, trans. 1989, pp.512ff&lt;/ref&gt;, as well as contemporary teachers such as R.C.Sproul &lt;ref&gt; Now, That's a Good Question!, R.C.Sproul, 1996, p124-5, 339-342,&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Among those typically identified with the [[Restoration Movement]] (seen by it's adherents as a &quot;restoration&quot; to first century Christianity), it is widely held that baptism is necessary in establishing a relationship with God. They practice baptism by full immersion in water, usually accompanied by an audible confession of faith. Such hold it evident that in first century Christianity, as recorded in the book of Acts, baptism was ubiquitous. ''Of the eleven major conversion accounts in Acts, baptism is explicitly included in ten and never excluded (either explicitly or implicitly).'' Furthermore, that biblical accounts of baptism with some degree of detail have often included phrases specifying the person(s) as going into or coming up out of water. This, along with biblical comparison of baptism to burial, is part of their evidence that the early Church practiced full immersion; as per the definition found in &quot;Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words&quot;; which reads in part; &quot;''consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence.''&quot; <br /> <br /> In this context, baptism is viewed as an act of faith, where one &quot;dead in sin&quot; becomes &quot;dead to sin&quot; and is raised to &quot;walk in newness of life&quot; by [[Divine grace]]; rather than as a work of self-righteousness. Infant baptism is not practiced among &quot;Restoration&quot; churches. Not only do they believe infants to be sinless until reaching an age of accountability for one's own sin; but also that without the necessary Faith and Repentance (of which infants and young children are incapable), immersion in water becomes a meaningless and purely physical act.<br /> <br /> The crux of understanding this view lies in seeing the one being baptized as a corpse; powerless to &quot;give life&quot; to oneself. The &quot;corpse&quot; is limited to recognizing one's own &quot;dead&quot; condition; and expressing Faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and source of eternal life. Rather than coming &quot;from&quot; the believer's Faith, Repentance, or Confession; or &quot;from&quot; application of water by the person performing the Baptism; the saving power comes only from the Grace of God, by the sacrifice of His Son. Just as Faith is a conduit for Grace, Baptism is &quot;when&quot; the Blood of Christ is initially applied; which continually cleanses baptized believers of sin (assuming they continue to walk in Faith and Repentance).<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Religion]]<br /> ==References==<br /> &lt;references/&gt;</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Baptism&diff=337059 2007-11-15T22:35:50Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>'''Baptism''' refers to the [[sacrament]] of initiation in the [[Catholic]] Church and [[Orthodox Church]] traditions, considered to be necessary for salvation in accordance with Jesus' teaching in John 3:5 '''Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'''. Because of this, infants are baptized a few weeks after being born. In the Catholic ritual, water is poured over the head of the child while the priest repeats the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19, &quot;I baptize you (name) in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.&quot; Adult converts to Catholicism are immersed in water for baptism during Easter vigil.<br /> <br /> In some Protestant churches, the water in John 3:5 is assumed to be the waters of birth and being born again refers to spiritual renewal. Thus baptism becomes an ordinance performed after conversion. Significance and mode of baptism remain controversial subjects among evangelical Protestant Christians.<br /> <br /> In the Reformed tradition, [[Presbyterian]] and others that hold to the [[Westminster Confession of Faith]], baptism is rightly administered to believing adults and the children of a believer, for a public confession and as a sign and seal of God's Covenant of [[Grace]]. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;&gt; The Westminster Confession of Faith for study classes by G.I.Williamson, 1964, pp207ff &lt;/ref&gt; It is properly administered by dipping, sprinkling or pouring, but is not essential for salvation. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;/&gt; Prominent past theologians have taught this doctrine such as John Calvin &lt;ref&gt; Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, 1536, trans. 1989, pp.512ff&lt;/ref&gt;, as well as contemporary teachers such as R.C.Sproul &lt;ref&gt; Now, That's a Good Question!, R.C.Sproul, 1996, p124-5, 339-342,&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Among those typically identified with the [[Restoration Movement]] (seen by it's adherents as a &quot;restoration&quot; to first century Christianity), it is widely held that baptism is necessary in establishing a relationship with God. They practice baptism by full immersion in water, usually accompanied by an audible confession of faith. Such hold it evident that in first century Christianity, as recorded in the book of Acts, baptism was ubiquitous. ''Of the eleven major conversion accounts in Acts, baptism is explicitly included in ten and never excluded (either explicitly or implicitly).'' Furthermore, that biblical accounts of baptism with some degree of detail have often included phrases specifying the person(s) as going into or coming up out of water. This, along with biblical comparison of baptism to burial, is part of their evidence that the early Church practiced full immersion; as per the definition found in &quot;Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words&quot;; which reads in part; &quot;''consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence.''&quot; In this context, baptism is viewed as an act of faith, where one becomes &quot;dead to sin&quot; and is raised to &quot;walk in newness of life&quot; by [[Divine grace]]; rather than as a work of self-righteousness. Infant baptism is not practiced among &quot;Restoration&quot; churches, since they believe infants to be sinless until reaching an age of accountability for one's own sin.<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Religion]]<br /> ==References==<br /> &lt;references/&gt;</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Baptism&diff=337058 2007-11-15T22:34:24Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>'''Baptism''' refers to the [[sacrament]] of initiation in the [[Catholic]] Church and [[Orthodox Church]] traditions, considered to be necessary for salvation in accordance with Jesus' teaching in John 3:5 '''Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'''. Because of this, infants are baptized a few weeks after being born. In the Catholic ritual, water is poured over the head of the child while the priest repeats the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19, &quot;I baptize you (name) in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.&quot; Adult converts to Catholicism are immersed in water for baptism during Easter vigil.<br /> <br /> In some Protestant churches, the water in John 3:5 is assumed to be the waters of birth and being born again refers to spiritual renewal. Thus baptism becomes an ordinance performed after conversion. Significance and mode of baptism remain controversial subjects among evangelical Protestant Christians.<br /> <br /> In the Reformed tradition, [[Presbyterian]] and others that hold to the [[Westminster Confession of Faith]], baptism is rightly administered to believing adults and the children of a believer, for a public confession and as a sign and seal of God's Covenant of [[Grace]]. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;&gt; The Westminster Confession of Faith for study classes by G.I.Williamson, 1964, pp207ff &lt;/ref&gt; It is properly administered by dipping, sprinkling or pouring, but is not essential for salvation. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;/&gt; Prominent past theologians have taught this doctrine such as John Calvin &lt;ref&gt; Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, 1536, trans. 1989, pp.512ff&lt;/ref&gt;, as well as contemporary teachers such as R.C.Sproul &lt;ref&gt; Now, That's a Good Question!, R.C.Sproul, 1996, p124-5, 339-342,&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Among those typically identified with the [[Restoration Movement]] (seen by it's adherents as a &quot;restoration&quot; to first century Christianity), it is widely held that baptism is necessary in establishing a relationship with God. They practice baptism by full immersion in water, usually accompanied by an audible confession of faith. Such hold it evident that in first century Christianity, as recorded in the book of Acts, baptism was ubiquitous. ''Of the eleven major conversion accounts in Acts, baptism is explicitly included in ten and never excluded (either explicitly or implicitly).'' Furthermore, that biblical accounts of baptism with some degree of detail have often included phrases specifying the person(s) as going into or coming up out of water. This, along with biblical comparison of baptism to burial, is part of their evidence that the early Church practiced full immersion; as per the definition found in &quot;Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words&quot;; which reads in part; &quot;''consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence.''&quot; In this context, baptism is viewed as an act of faith, where one becomes &quot;dead to sin&quot; and is raised to &quot;walk in newness of life&quot; by [[Divine Grace]]; rather than as a work of self-righteousness. Infant baptism is not practiced among &quot;Restoration&quot; churches, since they believe infants to be sinless until reaching an age of accountability for one's own sin.<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Religion]]<br /> ==References==<br /> &lt;references/&gt;</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:Did_Jesus_ever_claim_to_be_God%3F&diff=290823 2007-09-11T17:41:57Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>{{debate}}<br /> jesus claimed to be the son of god...right?? according to christanity...<br /> <br /> ==According to GOD==<br /> Matthew 3:17 &quot;And a voice from heaven said, &quot;This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.&quot; That's according to the Jews of His time. The Son of God that became the sin offering for all of mankind. Need more? Read the rest of the Old and New Testament.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 15:24, 28 June 2007 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ==According to Jesus himself==<br /> God is refered to as &quot;I AM&quot; in Exodus 3:14; &quot;And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.&quot;<br /> <br /> In the eighth chapter of the Gospel of John, some Jews asked Jesus who he was claiming to be. In his response, he included both the claim that he is the Son of God, and took on the self-existant name, &quot;I AM&quot;, that God declared to Moses.<br /> <br /> Jhn 8:53-59 &quot;Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? (v.54)Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: (v.55) Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. (v.56) Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad. (v.57) Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? (v.58) Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (v.59) Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.&quot;<br /> <br /> The Jews obviously understood the dual statements of &quot;my Father...is your God&quot; and &quot;Before Abraham was, I am&quot; as a doubly strong claim to the divine nature of God, since they tried to stone him on the spot.<br /> --[[User:DavidDeering|DavidDeering]] 13:41, 11 September 2007 (EDT)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Divine_grace&diff=280680 2007-08-29T21:55:31Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div> <br /> A general [[definition]] of &quot;[[grace]]&quot; is; &quot;mercy; clemency; pardon: an act of grace.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> <br /> ''' To even begin to understand [[God]]'s grace, we must first realize God is so pure and Holy that, before Him, all sin is a filthy stain which must be wiped out. On our own merits, we stand condemned before Him.''' <br /> Romans 3:23 - &quot;For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God&quot;<br /> Romans 6:23 - &quot;For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God<br /> [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord&quot;<br /> <br /> Some find using G.R.A.C.E. as an acronym for &quot;God's Riches at Christ's Expense&quot; to be helpful in remembering that God's gift of eternal life is made available at the expense of the sacrifice of His Son, [[Jesus Christ]]. <br /> <br /> Here are two of the numerous [[Bible]] verses proclaiming the principle of Grace.<br /> <br /> John 3:16-22<br /> <br /> 16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his<br /> only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him<br /> should not perish, but have everlasting life.<br /> 17) For God sent not his Son into the world to<br /> condemn the world; but that the world through him<br /> might be saved.<br /> 18) He that believeth on him is not condemned:<br /> but he that believeth not is condemned already,<br /> because he hath not believed in the name of the<br /> only begotten Son of God.<br /> 19) And this is the condemnation, that light is<br /> come into the world, and men loved darkness rather<br /> than light, because their deeds were evil.<br /> 20) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light,<br /> neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should<br /> be reproved.<br /> 21) But he that doeth truth cometh to the light,<br /> that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are<br /> wrought in God.<br /> 22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples<br /> into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them,<br /> and baptized. <br /> <br /> Titus 2:11-14<br /> <br /> 11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath<br /> appeared to all men,<br /> 12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly<br /> lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly,<br /> in this present world;<br /> 13) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious<br /> appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;<br /> 14) Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from<br /> all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people,<br /> zealous of good works.<br /> <br /> The Bible has a good deal to say about both Faith (sometimes called belief) and Obedience (sometimes called &quot;works&quot;) in connection with grace and salvation. Some passages in the Bible may focus more on one or the other, depending on the point being made in the context of the passage in question. <br /> <br /> We should be careful not to let a verse out of context, failure to recognize a seemingly extreme emphasis for the purpose of a special point, or our unfamiliarity with particular bilbical writer's style confuse us into thinking that we can erase our sins by the merit of our own works, or the power of our own Faith, or both.<br /> <br /> A good balance in understanding the roles of Grace, Faith, and Obedience may be obtained by reading James 2:17-24, Ephesians 2:4-10, and Mark 16:15-16.<br /> <br /> James 2 - Even though the word &quot;grace&quot; is not specifically used, please notice the word &quot;imputed&quot;, in verse 23. &quot;Impute&quot; is defined in theological terms as; &quot;4.Theology. to attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as derived from another.&quot; [Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007.]<br /> Abraham did not make himself righteous.<br /> When Abraham's faith was made complete (&quot;perfect&quot;) by his works, God granted him that status of righteousness. <br /> The strong emphasis on works in this passage is not to deny God's grace, or eliminate the role of faith. It is used to make plain the sad condition of those who have a belief in God; but are unwilling to put their faith into action and change their manner of living.<br /> <br /> Ephesians 2 - This passage clearly shows that, while both Faith and Works are important, it is only by the power of God's Grace that we can be granted eternal life**, freed from the death due us because of our sins. Even when the writer uses the term &quot;through faith&quot;, he follows it with &quot;and that not of yourselves&quot;. This stresses that faith, even though indispensable, is only a conduit for salvation and not the source.<br /> When one reads the whole book of Ephesians, a call to action is one of the major themes.<br /> Therefore, it is most fitting that verse 9 pointedly declares &quot;not of works, lest any man should boast&quot;. This helps us understand that while we are expected to act, these actions are a matter of obedience and not earnings.<br /> <br /> Mark 16 - When Jesus told his followers to preach the gospel, he did not say those who believed and were baptized saved themselves! He said the believer would &quot;be saved&quot;, when they showed that faith by allowing themselved to be buried in water. <br /> [Vine's***: BAPTISM “1.baptisma 'baptism,' consisting of the processes of<br /> immersion, submersion and emergence] <br /> This burial in and raising from plain, ordinary water is symbolic of the fact that the believer recognizes he or she is spiritually dead because of their own sin.<br /> It is a visible demonstration of an inward determination that only by trusting in the Grace of God through Jesus Christ, can we be raised to eternal life.(see Eph 2) <br /> <br /> '''''In a believing baptism, we absolutely deny that we could ever be free from sin through our own efforts; and we accept the Grace of God.'''''<br /> <br /> '''While it is true that we receive God's Grace when we obey him in faith; the saving power comes from the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ and not from us!'''<br /> <br /> [The initial entry here is copied by the author, from a corresponding page on the same subject of God's Grace at http://www.purereligion.net/grace.htm also by the author]<br /> <br /> *(American Standard Version - used specifically in this instance<br /> because word used in the KJV for &quot;condemned&quot; [starting with D]<br /> might block this page to those using clean language filters)<br /> **(quickened basically means &quot;made alive&quot;)<br /> *** ( Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words”<br /> © 1984, 1996 Thomas Nelson Inc.)<br /> [[User:DavidDeering|DavidDeering]] 17:55, 29 August 2007 (EDT)<br /> [[Category:Religion]]</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Baptism&diff=280651 2007-08-29T21:28:03Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>'''Baptism''' refers to the [[sacrament]] of initiation in the [[Catholic]] and [[Eastern Orthodox]] traditions, considered to be necessary for salvation in accordance with Jesus' teaching in John 3:5 '''Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'''. Because of this, infants are baptized a few weeks after being born. In the Catholic ritual, water is poured over the head of the child while the priest repeats the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19, &quot;I baptize you (name) in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.&quot; Adult converts to Catholicism are immersed in water for baptism during Easter vigil.<br /> <br /> In the Protestant tradition, the water in John 3:5 is assumed to be the waters of birth and being born again refers to spiritual renewal. Thus baptism becomes an ordinance performed after conversion, and is rarely administered to infants (paedobaptism).<br /> <br /> In the Reformed tradition, [[Presbyterian]] and others that hold to the [[Westminster Confession of Faith]], baptism is rightly administered to believing adults and the children of a believer, for a public confession and as a sign and seal of God's Covenant of [[Grace]]. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;&gt; The Westminster Confession of Faith for study classes by G.I.Williamson, 1964, pp207ff &lt;/ref&gt; It is properly administered by dipping, sprinkling or pouring, but is not essential for salvation. &lt;ref name=&quot;WCF&quot;/&gt; Prominent past theologians have taught this doctrine such as John Calvin &lt;ref&gt; Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, 1536, trans. 1989, pp.512ff&lt;/ref&gt;, as well as contemporary teachers such as R.C.Sproul &lt;ref&gt; Now, That's a Good Question!, R.C.Sproul, 1996, p124-5, 339-342,&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Significance and mode of baptism remain controversial subjects among evangelical Christians.<br /> <br /> [[Category:Religion]]<br /> ==References==<br /> &lt;references/&gt;</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Grace&diff=280646 2007-08-29T21:26:13Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div>In the context of Religion, see [[Divine grace]].</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Grace&diff=280640 2007-08-29T21:23:33Z

<p>DavidDeering: New page: In the context of Religion, see Divine Grace.</p> <hr /> <div>In the context of Religion, see [[Divine Grace]].</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Divine_grace&diff=246337 2007-07-23T16:58:35Z

<p>DavidDeering: While it is true that we receive God's Grace when we obey him in faith; the saving power comes from the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ and not from us!</p> <hr /> <div> <br /> A general definition of &quot;grace&quot; is; &quot;mercy; clemency; pardon: an act of grace.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> <br /> ''' To even begin to understand God's grace, we must first realize God is so pure and Holy that, before Him, all sin is a filthy stain which must be wiped out. On our own merits, we stand condemned before Him.''' <br /> Romans 3:23 - &quot;For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God&quot;<br /> Romans 6:23 - &quot;For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life<br /> through Jesus Christ our Lord&quot;<br /> <br /> Some find using G.R.A.C.E. as an acronym for &quot;God's Riches at Christ's Expense&quot; to be helpful in remembering that God's gift of eternal life is made available at the expense of the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ. <br /> <br /> Here are two of the numerous Bible verses proclaiming the principle of Grace.<br /> <br /> John 3:16-22<br /> <br /> 16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever<br /> believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.<br /> 17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world<br /> through him might be saved.<br /> 18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned<br /> already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.<br /> 19) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness<br /> rather than light, because their deeds were evil.<br /> 20) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light,<br /> lest his deeds should be reproved.<br /> 21) But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest,<br /> that they are wrought in God.<br /> 22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there<br /> he tarried with them, and baptized. <br /> <br /> Titus 2:11-14<br /> <br /> 11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,<br /> 12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly,<br /> righteously, and godly, in this present world;<br /> 13) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God<br /> and our Saviour Jesus Christ;<br /> 14) Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity,<br /> and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.<br /> <br /> The Bible has a good deal to say about both Faith (sometimes called belief) and Obedience<br /> (sometimes called &quot;works&quot;) in connection with grace and salvation. Some passages<br /> in the Bible may focus more on one or the other, depending on the point being made <br /> in the context of the passage in question. <br /> <br /> We should be careful not to let a verse out of context, failure to recognize a seemingly<br /> extreme emphasis for the purpose of a special point, or our unfamiliarity with particular<br /> bilbical writer's style confuse us into thinking that we can erase our sins by the merit<br /> of our own works, or the power of our own Faith, or both.<br /> <br /> A good balance in understanding the roles of Grace, Faith, and Obedience may be obtained<br /> by reading James 2:17-24, Ephesians 2:4-10, and Mark 16:15-16.<br /> <br /> James 2 - Even though the word &quot;grace&quot; is not specifically used, please notice the word<br /> &quot;imputed&quot;, in verse 23. &quot;Impute&quot; is defined in theological terms as; &quot;4.Theology. to<br /> attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as<br /> derived from another.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> Abraham did not make himself righteous. When Abraham's faith was made complete<br /> (&quot;perfect&quot;) by his works, God granted him that status of righteousness. <br /> The strong emphasis on works in this passage is not to deny God's grace,<br /> or eliminate the role of faith. It is used to make plain the sad condition<br /> of those who have a belief in God; but are unwilling to put their faith into action<br /> and change their manner of living.<br /> <br /> Ephesians 2 - This passage clearly shows that, while both Faith and Works are important,<br /> it is only by the power of God's Grace that we can be granted eternal life**, freed from<br /> the death due us because of our sins. Even when the writer uses the term &quot;through faith&quot;,<br /> he follows it with &quot;and that not of yourselves&quot;. This stresses that faith, even though<br /> indispensable, is only a conduit for salvation and not the source.<br /> When one reads the whole book of Ephesians, a call to action is one of the major themes.<br /> Therefore, it is most fitting that verse 9 pointedly declares &quot;not of works, lest any<br /> man should boast&quot;. This helps us understand that while we are expected to act, these<br /> actions are a matter of obedience and not earnings.<br /> <br /> Mark 16 - When Jesus told his followers to preach the gospel, he did not say those who<br /> believed and were baptized saved themselves! He said the believer would &quot;be saved&quot;,<br /> when they showed that faith by allowing themselved to be buried in water. <br /> [Vine's***: BAPTISM “1.baptisma 'baptism,' consisting of the processes of<br /> immersion, submersion and emergence] <br /> This burial in and raising from plain, ordinary water is symbolic of the fact<br /> that the believer recognizes he or she is spiritually dead because of their own sin.<br /> It is a visible demonstration of an inward determination that only by trusting<br /> in the Grace of God through Jesus Christ, can we be raised to eternal life.(see Eph 2) <br /> In a believing baptism, we absolutely deny that we could ever be free from sin<br /> through our own efforts; and we accept the Grace of God. <br /> <br /> '''While it is true that we receive God's Grace when we obey him in faith; the saving power comes from the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ and not from us!'''<br /> <br /> [The initial entry here is copied by the author, from a corresponding page on the same subject of God's Grace at http://www.purereligion.net/grace.htm also by the author]<br /> <br /> *(American Standard Version - used specifically in this instance because word used in<br /> the KJV for &quot;condemned&quot; [starting with D] might block this page to those using clean language filters)<br /> **(quickened basically means &quot;made alive&quot;)<br /> *** ( Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words” © 1984, 1996 Thomas Nelson Inc.)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Divine_grace&diff=246335 2007-07-23T16:56:32Z

<p>DavidDeering: While it is true that we receive God's Grace when we obey him in faith; the saving power comes from the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ and not from us!</p> <hr /> <div> <br /> A general definition of &quot;grace&quot; is; &quot;mercy; clemency; pardon: an act of grace.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> <br /> ''' To even begin to understand God's grace, we must first realize God is so pure and Holy that,<br /> before Him, all sin is a filthy stain which must be wiped out. On our own merits, we stand<br /> condemned before Him.''' <br /> Romans 3:23 - &quot;For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God&quot;<br /> Romans 6:23 - &quot;For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life<br /> through Jesus Christ our Lord&quot;<br /> <br /> Some find using G.R.A.C.E. as an acronym for &quot;God's Riches at Christ's Expense&quot; to be helpful in remembering that God's gift of eternal life is made available at the expense of the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ. <br /> <br /> Here are two of the numerous Bible verses proclaiming the principle of Grace.<br /> <br /> John 3:16-22<br /> <br /> 16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever<br /> believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.<br /> 17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world<br /> through him might be saved.<br /> 18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned<br /> already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.<br /> 19) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness<br /> rather than light, because their deeds were evil.<br /> 20) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light,<br /> lest his deeds should be reproved.<br /> 21) But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest,<br /> that they are wrought in God.<br /> 22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there<br /> he tarried with them, and baptized. <br /> <br /> Titus 2:11-14<br /> <br /> 11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,<br /> 12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly,<br /> righteously, and godly, in this present world;<br /> 13) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God<br /> and our Saviour Jesus Christ;<br /> 14) Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity,<br /> and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.<br /> <br /> The Bible has a good deal to say about both Faith (sometimes called belief) and Obedience<br /> (sometimes called &quot;works&quot;) in connection with grace and salvation. Some passages<br /> in the Bible may focus more on one or the other, depending on the point being made <br /> in the context of the passage in question. <br /> <br /> We should be careful not to let a verse out of context, failure to recognize a seemingly<br /> extreme emphasis for the purpose of a special point, or our unfamiliarity with particular<br /> bilbical writer's style confuse us into thinking that we can erase our sins by the merit<br /> of our own works, or the power of our own Faith, or both.<br /> <br /> A good balance in understanding the roles of Grace, Faith, and Obedience may be obtained<br /> by reading James 2:17-24, Ephesians 2:4-10, and Mark 16:15-16.<br /> <br /> James 2 - Even though the word &quot;grace&quot; is not specifically used, please notice the word<br /> &quot;imputed&quot;, in verse 23. &quot;Impute&quot; is defined in theological terms as; &quot;4.Theology. to<br /> attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as<br /> derived from another.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> Abraham did not make himself righteous. When Abraham's faith was made complete<br /> (&quot;perfect&quot;) by his works, God granted him that status of righteousness. <br /> The strong emphasis on works in this passage is not to deny God's grace,<br /> or eliminate the role of faith. It is used to make plain the sad condition<br /> of those who have a belief in God; but are unwilling to put their faith into action<br /> and change their manner of living.<br /> <br /> Ephesians 2 - This passage clearly shows that, while both Faith and Works are important,<br /> it is only by the power of God's Grace that we can be granted eternal life**, freed from<br /> the death due us because of our sins. Even when the writer uses the term &quot;through faith&quot;,<br /> he follows it with &quot;and that not of yourselves&quot;. This stresses that faith, even though<br /> indispensable, is only a conduit for salvation and not the source.<br /> When one reads the whole book of Ephesians, a call to action is one of the major themes.<br /> Therefore, it is most fitting that verse 9 pointedly declares &quot;not of works, lest any<br /> man should boast&quot;. This helps us understand that while we are expected to act, these<br /> actions are a matter of obedience and not earnings.<br /> <br /> Mark 16 - When Jesus told his followers to preach the gospel, he did not say those who<br /> believed and were baptized saved themselves! He said the believer would &quot;be saved&quot;,<br /> when they showed that faith by allowing themselved to be buried in water. <br /> [Vine's***: BAPTISM “1.baptisma 'baptism,' consisting of the processes of<br /> immersion, submersion and emergence] <br /> This burial in and raising from plain, ordinary water is symbolic of the fact<br /> that the believer recognizes he or she is spiritually dead because of their own sin.<br /> It is a visible demonstration of an inward determination that only by trusting<br /> in the Grace of God through Jesus Christ, can we be raised to eternal life.(see Eph 2) <br /> In a believing baptism, we absolutely deny that we could ever be free from sin<br /> through our own efforts; and we accept the Grace of God. <br /> <br /> '''While it is true that we receive God's Grace when we obey him in faith; the saving power comes from the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ and not from us!'''<br /> <br /> [The initial entry here is copied by the author, from a corresponding page on the same subject of God's Grace at http://www.purereligion.net/grace.htm also by the author]<br /> <br /> *(American Standard Version - used specifically in this instance because word used in<br /> the KJV for &quot;condemned&quot; [starting with D] might block this page to those using clean language filters)<br /> **(quickened basically means &quot;made alive&quot;)<br /> *** ( Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words” © 1984, 1996 Thomas Nelson Inc.)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Divine_grace&diff=246330 2007-07-23T16:50:04Z

<p>DavidDeering: </p> <hr /> <div> <br /> A general definition of &quot;grace&quot; is; &quot;mercy; clemency; pardon: an act of grace.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> <br /> To even begin to understand God's grace, we must first realize God is so pure and Holy that,<br /> before Him, all sin is a filthy stain which must be wiped out. On our own merits, we stand<br /> condemned before Him. <br /> Romans 3:23 - &quot;For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God&quot;<br /> Romans 6:23 - &quot;For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life<br /> through Jesus Christ our Lord&quot;<br /> <br /> Some find using G.R.A.C.E. as an acronym for &quot;God's Riches at Christ's Expense&quot; to be helpful in remembering that God's gift of eternal life is made available at the expense of the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ. <br /> <br /> Here are two of the numerous Bible verses proclaiming the principle of Grace.<br /> <br /> John 3:16-22<br /> <br /> 16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever<br /> believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.<br /> 17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world<br /> through him might be saved.<br /> 18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned<br /> already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.<br /> 19) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness<br /> rather than light, because their deeds were evil.<br /> 20) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light,<br /> lest his deeds should be reproved.<br /> 21) But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest,<br /> that they are wrought in God.<br /> 22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there<br /> he tarried with them, and baptized. <br /> <br /> Titus 2:11-14<br /> <br /> 11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,<br /> 12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly,<br /> righteously, and godly, in this present world;<br /> 13) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God<br /> and our Saviour Jesus Christ;<br /> 14) Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity,<br /> and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.<br /> <br /> The Bible has a good deal to say about both Faith (sometimes called belief) and Obedience<br /> (sometimes called &quot;works&quot;) in connection with grace and salvation. Some passages<br /> in the Bible may focus more on one or the other, depending on the point being made <br /> in the context of the passage in question. <br /> <br /> We should be careful not to let a verse out of context, failure to recognize a seemingly<br /> extreme emphasis for the purpose of a special point, or our unfamiliarity with particular<br /> bilbical writer's style confuse us into thinking that we can erase our sins by the merit<br /> of our own works, or the power of our own Faith, or both.<br /> <br /> A good balance in understanding the roles of Grace, Faith, and Obedience may be obtained<br /> by reading James 2:17-24, Ephesians 2:4-10, and Mark 16:15-16.<br /> <br /> James 2 - Even though the word &quot;grace&quot; is not specifically used, please notice the word<br /> &quot;imputed&quot;, in verse 23. &quot;Impute&quot; is defined in theological terms as; &quot;4.Theology. to<br /> attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as<br /> derived from another.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> Abraham did not make himself righteous. When Abraham's faith was made complete<br /> (&quot;perfect&quot;) by his works, God granted him that status of righteousness. <br /> The strong emphasis on works in this passage is not to deny God's grace,<br /> or eliminate the role of faith. It is used to make plain the sad condition<br /> of those who have a belief in God; but are unwilling to put their faith into action<br /> and change their manner of living.<br /> <br /> Ephesians 2 - This passage clearly shows that, while both Faith and Works are important,<br /> it is only by the power of God's Grace that we can be granted eternal life**, freed from<br /> the death due us because of our sins. Even when the writer uses the term &quot;through faith&quot;,<br /> he follows it with &quot;and that not of yourselves&quot;. This stresses that faith, even though<br /> indispensable, is only a conduit for salvation and not the source.<br /> When one reads the whole book of Ephesians, a call to action is one of the major themes.<br /> Therefore, it is most fitting that verse 9 pointedly declares &quot;not of works, lest any<br /> man should boast&quot;. This helps us understand that while we are expected to act, these<br /> actions are a matter of obedience and not earnings.<br /> <br /> Mark 16 - When Jesus told his followers to preach the gospel, he did not say those who<br /> believed and were baptized saved themselves! He said the believer would &quot;be saved&quot;,<br /> when they showed that faith by allowing themselved to be buried in water. <br /> [Vine's***: BAPTISM “1.baptisma 'baptism,' consisting of the processes of<br /> immersion, submersion and emergence] <br /> This burial in and raising from plain, ordinary water is symbolic of the fact<br /> that the believer recognizes he or she is spiritually dead because of their own sin.<br /> It is a visible demonstration of an inward determination that only by trusting<br /> in the Grace of God through Jesus Christ, can we be raised to eternal life.(see Eph 2) <br /> In a believing baptism, we absolutely deny that we could ever be free from sin<br /> through our own efforts; and we accept the Grace of God. <br /> <br /> [The initial entry here is copied by the author, from a corresponding page on the same subject of God's Grace at http://www.purereligion.net/grace.htm also by the author]<br /> <br /> *(American Standard Version - used specifically in this instance because word used in<br /> the KJV for &quot;condemned&quot; [starting with D] might block this page to those using clean language filters)<br /> **(quickened basically means &quot;made alive&quot;)<br /> *** ( Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words” © 1984, 1996 Thomas Nelson Inc.)</div>

DavidDeering https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Divine_grace&diff=246320 2007-07-23T16:43:47Z

<p>DavidDeering: While the Bible may state conditions under which Grace is given, never conclude these to purchase or earn Grace. Faith does not stand in the place of Grace, any more than obedience &quot;earns&quot; Grace.</p> <hr /> <div> <br /> A general definition of &quot;grace&quot; is; &quot;mercy; clemency; pardon: an act of grace.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ]<br /> <br /> To even begin to understand God's grace, we must first realize God is so pure and Holy that, before Him, all sin is a filthy stain which must be wiped out. On our own merits, we stand condemned before Him. <br /> Romans 3:23 - &quot;For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God&quot;<br /> Romans 6:23 - &quot;For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord&quot;<br /> <br /> Some find using G.R.A.C.E. as an acronym for &quot;God's Riches at Christ's Expense&quot; to be helpful in remembering that God's gift of eternal life is made available at the expense of the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ. <br /> <br /> Here are two of the numerous Bible verses proclaiming the principle of Grace.<br /> <br /> John 3:16-22<br /> <br /> 16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.<br /> 17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.<br /> 18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.<br /> 19) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.<br /> 20) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.<br /> 21) But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.<br /> 22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. <br /> <br /> Titus 2:11-14<br /> <br /> 11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,<br /> 12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;<br /> 13) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;<br /> 14) Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.<br /> <br /> The Bible has a good deal to say about both Faith (sometimes called belief) and Obedience (sometimes called &quot;works&quot;) in connection with grace and salvation. Some passages in the Bible may focus more on one or the other, depending on the point being made in the context of the passage in question. <br /> <br /> We should be careful not to let a verse out of context, failure to recognize a seemingly extreme emphasis for the purpose of a special point, or our unfamiliarity with particular bilbical writer's style confuse us into thinking that we can erase our sins by the merit of our own works, or the power of our own Faith, or both.<br /> <br /> A good balance in understanding the roles of Grace, Faith, and Obedience may be obtained by reading James 2:17-24, Ephesians 2:4-10, and Mark 16:15-16.<br /> <br /> James 2 - Even though the word &quot;grace&quot; is not specifically used, please notice the word &quot;imputed&quot;, in verse 23. &quot;Impute&quot; is defined in theological terms as; &quot;4.Theology. to attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as derived from another.&quot; [ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jun. 2007. ] Abraham did not make himself righteous. When Abraham's faith was made complete (&quot;perfect&quot;) by his works, God granted him that status of righteousness. <br /> The strong emphasis on works in this passage is not to deny God's grace, or eliminate the role of faith. It is used to make plain the sad condition of those who have a belief in God; but are unwilling to put their faith into action and change their manner of living.<br /> <br /> Ephesians 2 - This passage clearly shows that, while both Faith and Works are important, it is only by the power of God's Grace that we can be granted eternal life**, freed from the death due us because of our sins. Even when the writer uses the term &quot;through faith&quot;, he follows it with &quot;and that not of yourselves&quot;. This stresses that faith, even though indispensable, is only a conduit for salvation and not the source.<br /> When one reads the whole book of Ephesians, a call to action is one of the major themes. Therefore, it is most fitting that verse 9 pointedly declares &quot;not of works, lest any man should boast&quot;. This helps us understand that while we are expected to act, these actions are a matter of obedience and not earnings.<br /> <br /> Mark 16 - When Jesus told his followers to preach the gospel, he did not say those who believed and were baptized saved themselves! He said the believer would &quot;be saved&quot;, when they showed that faith by allowing themselved to be buried in water. [Vine's***: BAPTISM “1.baptisma 'baptism,' consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence] <br /> This burial in and raising from plain, ordinary water is symbolic of the fact that the believer recognizes he or she is spiritually dead because of their own sin. It is a visible demonstration of an inward determination that only by trusting in the Grace of God through Jesus Christ, can we be raised to eternal life.(see Eph 2) In a believing baptism, we absolutely deny that we could ever be free from sin through our own efforts; and we accept the Grace of God. <br /> <br /> [The initial entry here is copied by the author, from a corresponding page on the same subject of God's Grace at http://www.purereligion.net/grace.htm also by the author]<br /> <br /> *(American Standard Version - used specifically in this instance because word used in the KJV for &quot;condemned&quot; [starting with D] might block this page to those using clean language filters)<br /> **(quickened basically means &quot;made alive&quot;)<br /> *** ( Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words” © 1984, 1996 Thomas Nelson Inc.)</div>

DavidDeering