Difference between revisions of "Talk:Eternal security (salvation)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (will review later) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:::I don't like it either, but [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heresy Merriam Webster] allows for the term being used to mean "dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice; To disagree with the party leadership" in the secondary definition. Using this definition to defend it is a little bit of a stretch (it is a secondary meaning), but still an arguable point. I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who disagrees with this category, though. I would not at all be opposed to the category being removed. I will review this issue and the new content when I have time. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 10:55, 17 October 2017 (EDT) | :::I don't like it either, but [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heresy Merriam Webster] allows for the term being used to mean "dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice; To disagree with the party leadership" in the secondary definition. Using this definition to defend it is a little bit of a stretch (it is a secondary meaning), but still an arguable point. I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who disagrees with this category, though. I would not at all be opposed to the category being removed. I will review this issue and the new content when I have time. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 10:55, 17 October 2017 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::If there is legitimate debate over a doctrine, it should have the "heresy" label at the bottom because that (in the eyes of the reader) makes the article appear to take the side of the position that the doctrine is false and thus heresy on the level of Gnosticism and Arianism. At least, if we include this category here, we should add this category to the opposing theological doctrine, since Christians who believe this doctrine probably view the doctrine that Christians can lose their salvation as a heresy. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:59, 17 October 2017 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 14:59, October 17, 2017
Hi, might this be better placed under the name "Eternal security," with a redirect from here to there? --David B (TALK) 09:23, 17 October 2017 (EDT)
- Also, I see your point about the category. I still don't really like it there, but I looked up the definition of heresy, and found my understanding of the word was slightly off. If you think it belongs there, then I suppose that's fine. --David B (TALK) 09:54, 17 October 2017 (EDT)
- I don't like it either, but Merriam Webster allows for the term being used to mean "dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice; To disagree with the party leadership" in the secondary definition. Using this definition to defend it is a little bit of a stretch (it is a secondary meaning), but still an arguable point. I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who disagrees with this category, though. I would not at all be opposed to the category being removed. I will review this issue and the new content when I have time. --David B (TALK) 10:55, 17 October 2017 (EDT)
- If there is legitimate debate over a doctrine, it should have the "heresy" label at the bottom because that (in the eyes of the reader) makes the article appear to take the side of the position that the doctrine is false and thus heresy on the level of Gnosticism and Arianism. At least, if we include this category here, we should add this category to the opposing theological doctrine, since Christians who believe this doctrine probably view the doctrine that Christians can lose their salvation as a heresy. --1990'sguy (talk) 10:59, 17 October 2017 (EDT)