Talk:Honor Academy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 5/4/2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
[edit] Neutrality
I am not sure why this article was nominated to be checked for neutrality. I feel that this article is simply informational and does not promote or advocate any particular point of view. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Davidwilson (talk • contribs) 15:32, November 9, 2005 (UTC)
- If this was for a commercial organisation, in the strict sense of the phrase, it would be considered advertising. If it is allowed an exemption, then the phrases "dedicate a year of their life to seeing the fulfilment of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-18) and to spark a second Student Volunteer Movement. Strong emphasis is placed on ones character and living an honorable life before God and those around them." and "symbolizes their commitment to a lifetime pursuit of honor." are not neutral. To a non-christian such as myself, this line is both offensive and expresses a POV. There are other ways of stating this phrase without assuming that all readers are christians or that all readers wish to be evangelised. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 20:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- First of all, not every thing that is done that seems to be beneficial to Christianity is done for the purpose of evangelism. I find that offensive. Sometimes people are just approaching situations in life from the standpoint of their worldview. Because they dont have the opposite worldview, there will be a clash, but it is not always intentional. That you are offended means that you have no tolerance for anything other than atheism. Athiests should not demand that all things written should be only inoffensive to athiests. Just remember that Athiesm ruled among the Epicurians and Stoics thousands of years ago, and fell on its face. It is likely that it will happen again, as currently the trend among the masses is to accept ideas with a spiritual postmodernism.
-
-
-
- Second, you are right that the article is a bit biased, I just found it today, and I agree with you that it could be written better. I have made some changes to the page since the author gave alumni an ok to do so. Please overview it so that it can be corrected to be as unbiased as possible, because you were right that it was biased, but please grow a backbone if you find it offensive. It did not reference the doctrine of eternal damnation, there was nothing about repentance, salvation, or any of the other point of doctrine that is agreed upon at any seminary as key concepts of historic Christianity.
-
-
-
- As for the statement on honor, it fully fits in context with the Wikipedia definition of honor. Honarable life before God would be apply the Wikipedia definiton of honor to its context of God. Its quite simple. It appears that you may be more biased if anything.
-
-
-
- This is a world with different opinions and ideas. Allowing any philosophy to offend you is absurd. Its a philosophy. If you don't like it, dismiss it as a foolish philosophy. At least the Greeks knew how to do that. You can start with the philosophical approach to reacting to other philosophies that I have just stated above.
-
-
-
- -John 02:49, 21 November 2005
-
[edit] Bias
why is the comment about the "academy’s tenets" back up. i have never NEVER seen those things written down on TMM or HA material.
the articale they come from is one of the most biased i have ever read. if you want to bash TMM do it from somthing that is REAL (and trust me there is plenty to bash about) but dont make crap up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.37.33.3 (talk • contribs) 16:46, July 12, 2006 (UTC)
this should be unbiased. i feel like the tone of the articale is WAY to biased against TMM and the HA. The rules exist for a reason. i feel like isolating those few (and imaginary) rules does not give the full view of what, and why the rules exist. if we have to keep the ofensive articile we should be able to add what the rule ACUTUALY is, and if it is even reasonable to enforce. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.37.33.3 (talk • contribs) 17:06, July 12, 2006 (UTC)
- The "Controversy" section has been rewritten. It originally contained several "complaints" that were clearly non-neutral airings of a disgruntled ex-intern's views. It only proves that some "get it", and some do not. The rules of the Academy are totally consistent with standard Christian teachings, and are typical of most Christian youth groups and education centers, including private schools, "bible colleges", etc. They are also consistent with most military schools, academies, boarding schools, and even many secular private schools. In that context the rules are appropriate - not some kind of crazy off-the-beaten-path cult group type rules - which is what the original poster semed to be implying. --T-dot 14:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Multiple changes
Some of the key changes I just made:
- Replace external Bible links with internal links to the Great Commission. Makes more sense to me to direct people to an article on the concept (which includes the Scripture) than outside Wikipedia.
- Added an infobox
- Section off the page a bit. This isn't complete as the rules and regulations section still contains info about the Graduate Internship, which I didn't touch yet because...
- That rules and regulations section is rather non-neutral at times. The rules it describes are technically correct, however the tone is condescending at times, such as "This is for those who have made it through an entire year with out getting dismissed or leaving..." It just needs to be rewritten, I think. I'll work on that, but can't at the moment.
