User talk:71.243.175.126

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Reversion to Criticism of Christianity

Hi, User 71.243.175.126. You asked me why I reverted your comment on the second coming of Jesus on the Criticism of Christianity page. The reason I did it is because it is contrary to several articles of wikipedian policy.

The WP:NPOV and WP:NOR policies mean that wikipedia is supposed to give a balanced account of the different opinions that qualified individuals hold on things. There are a number of different opinions held about when the bible states that Jesus will come back - most Christians (myself included) would hold that we don't actually have a clue. Regardless of whether your opinion turns out to be right or not, the policy of wikipedia is to cover mainstream academic opinion, and not present one side of a disputed issue as fact.

You could, for example, state that "suchandsuch authoritative figure has stated that...", as an explanation for how it fitted in there, if it is notable enough to be there. I don't actually think it is - the criticism of Christianity section is primarily about criticisms about Christianity, and only secondly about responses to those critisisms. It should have a more balanced look than it currently does, but it's not supposed to cover all possible comebacks, but rather some of the more prominent or notable ones. It is my strong suspicion that what you included is not prominent enough to be entered there.

Do feel free to argue with me if you think I've got anything wrong in what I've said, mind, though.TheologyJohn 01:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)