Difference between revisions of "Talk:Preachology"
(Revert; this is the talk page, not the article) |
m (New topics go at the end.) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==Small Talk== | ||
Is it April 1 already? [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 09:38, 31 March 2008 (EDT) | Is it April 1 already? [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 09:38, 31 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
:Actually, yes. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:41, 1 April 2008 (Australian Eastern Daylight Time) | :Actually, yes. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:41, 1 April 2008 (Australian Eastern Daylight Time) | ||
::That explains it, then! [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 09:42, 31 March 2008 (EDT) | ::That explains it, then! [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 09:42, 31 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | No, it is no longer April 1st. However, it is nearly April 15th, better known as the ''day we fools send Uncle Sam a receipt for the money he stole from us''. {{unsigned|Wired4jesus}} | ||
| + | : It was, of course, 1st April when those posts were made (where I am at least). And I don't plan on sending uncle Sam any money at all. In fact, I don't even have an uncle Sam. :-) [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:13, 11 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::By all means, if you have no Uncle Sam, than don't send him any money. Unless of course it is April 1st, and then just send it to me. [[User:Wired4jesus|Wired4jesus]] 01:44, 12 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Preaching is a "science"== | ||
| + | |||
| + | At the risk of 90/10 repercussions, I have re re-edited back to my original word '''''science''''' in the opening statement on the '''Preachology''' article. Preaching would be classified as a social science. The effects of preaching can be measured. A study was conducted within a Church congregation on the effects of preaching, The eighty two participants were tested in five categories: knowledge, pseudo-behavior, a subjective evaluation on the participant's act of worship, a subjective evaluation of the preacher, and semantic differential. [http://www.jstor.org/pss/1386252][[User:Wired4jesus|Wired4jesus]] 00:45, 14 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 06:54, April 14, 2008
Small Talk
Is it April 1 already? Humblpi 09:38, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
- Actually, yes. Philip J. Rayment 00:41, 1 April 2008 (Australian Eastern Daylight Time)
- That explains it, then! Humblpi 09:42, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
No, it is no longer April 1st. However, it is nearly April 15th, better known as the day we fools send Uncle Sam a receipt for the money he stole from us. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wired4jesus (talk)
- It was, of course, 1st April when those posts were made (where I am at least). And I don't plan on sending uncle Sam any money at all. In fact, I don't even have an uncle Sam. :-) Philip J. Rayment 21:13, 11 April 2008 (EDT)
- By all means, if you have no Uncle Sam, than don't send him any money. Unless of course it is April 1st, and then just send it to me. Wired4jesus 01:44, 12 April 2008 (EDT)
Preaching is a "science"
At the risk of 90/10 repercussions, I have re re-edited back to my original word science in the opening statement on the Preachology article. Preaching would be classified as a social science. The effects of preaching can be measured. A study was conducted within a Church congregation on the effects of preaching, The eighty two participants were tested in five categories: knowledge, pseudo-behavior, a subjective evaluation on the participant's act of worship, a subjective evaluation of the preacher, and semantic differential. [1]Wired4jesus 00:45, 14 April 2008 (EDT)