Talk:New Creation Church (Singapore)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
 An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore. To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality. |
| The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Contents |
[edit] Fact check and POV dispute
I added these templates. The bulk of the article seems to be a diatribe against the teachings of this particular church. This came to my attention when an unlinked section referring to this church was added to the article about antinomianism.
I have no position about whether these claims are true or not, but they seem to be fairly serious accusations. Some sort of verifiable information needs to back up these controversial claims, identifying who made them and when. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well I realized that my post had been cleaned up as well, those below is it is a research by a group of university students that is trained to watch from a neutral passive observers point of view. Some of the controversy maybe doctrinal but i think its only fair to inform the public as such. Quotes directly from the pastors themselves are good evidences. I am absolutely neutral and i hold no grudges nor am I affiliated with the church in any way.
I think its good to inform others what is the difference of this particular charismatic church with others, even in doctrinal. If the cleanup continues, there wouldn't be left anything in this section. -Jack
-
- If you want to add content that is of such a nature, you must back it up with specific sources and reference them at the bottom of the article. Ariedartin JECJY Talk 06:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible that the disputed section be posted here so that people can view them to say the least, knowing it is being disputed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darklord 1984 (talk • contribs)
[edit] Doctrine
I removed:
Pastor Joseph Prince's main doctrinal focus is on Jesus Christ, His finished work on the cross, the new covenant of Grace created by God as a result of His love for people. He believes in God as graceful, merciful, loving, a bondage-breaker, a healing-maker, a burden-remover and a curse-destroyer. Pastor Joseph Prince claims a special anointing for preaching the grace message. It is said that he has preached about cheap grace, a theory that believers can sin as much as they want and get forgiven by Jesus Christ. However, he explained that there is no cheap grace cause unmerited favor is not cheap because Jesus died for the entire human race. Tthough it is free for sinners cause they can never merit it. He has time and time again said from the pulpit that he is against sin, as can heard from his sermons which can be purchased from the church's link below.
This is unsourced (see WP:BLP ) and reads like a sermon, stating matters of doctrine ("Jesus died for the entire human race") as if they were facts. I really question whether the article has to include this section at all. Kla'quot 17:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed, this is not a Christian Wikipedia and those would have little meaning, and furthermore that content would seem like Original Research. This is not a forum. And it's advertising the sermons too, if you noticed. I feel that this text should not be put back onto the page, unless there are some really big overhauls to it. Ariedartin JECJY Talk 06:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
No doubt this is not a Christian Wikipedia, I believe the purpose is to inform anyone who is looking for info on this church to be able get that information here. And one of the key areas of info would be the Doctrine of the church. My suggestion is to clean up the text to be more factual and objective so that it does not sound too "preachy". However do note that doctrines are matter of faith, not fact. The only factual part of the doctrine is the fact that the church believes in it. :-) Boldeagle 16:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please do. We would like to see the finished product. As no expert on the subject myself, I would leave it to those who could phrase it appropriately. And try to keep it simple, and try to wikilink to articles on Christian doctrines so that you won't find yourself over-elaborating and basically repeating what can be found elsewhere on Wikipedia. =) Ariedartin JECJY Talk 12:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have made some minor changes to the reference to the megachurches, so that it is consistent with FCBC and CHC. However to do justice to other megachurches in Singapore, I will verify the facts first before posting other megachurches in the same list. Toyota1973 06:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have added Lighthouse Evangelism, Victory Family Centre and Trinity Christian Centre as megachurches in Singapore from my interaction with friends from these churches. I will try also gather more statistics and may come up with a list of churches in Singapore with more than 2000 people in weekly attendances; maybe in another sub-grouping. (Maybe I will do this as part of my research in my current post graduate studies.) Hopefully this will help. Toyota1973 19:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
It's unnecessary to the article and so is deleted. - 202.156.12.10 04:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree that the section is unnecessary. The article makes no mention of the church's doctrine or affiliation with any specific denomination. Although the above mentioned paragraph sounds like an advertisement or sermon, the article should mention general doctrine and any areas that deviate significantly from basic Christian doctrine. Comparison/contrast could be drawn between the church and specific, established denominations or sects. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 15:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] To whoever it may be concerned
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article New Creation Church (Singapore), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Shona MacCormack 11:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
I propose that the information in Joseph Prince be merged into a section of this article. The Church itself seems to be marginally notable, via third-party coverage in major Singapore press. However, Joseph Prince himself, though he is definitely notable in relation to the Church, does not yet seem to be notable enough for his own bio. Judging by how fast the church's congregation is growing, this may well change in the future. But for now, I think that all the information should be maintained in one article about the Church. --Elonka 22:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
It has been expanded and should be ready for a redirect.218.186.9.4 12:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
