Talk:Church of God

message: I wonder why this Church of God page redirects to the Seventh-day Adventist Church? Some entries for the Church of God evidently do not intend the Seventh-day Adventists - for example, Demographics of Jamaica, where both Seventh-day Adventist and Church of God are listed separately (two different Protestant groups). Rlvaughn 14:34, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: I have looked over the links to Church of God, which currently includes only four:
*Demographics of the Cayman Islands 
*Demographics of Kiribati
*Demographics of Jamaica 
*Organization of the Islamic Conference
I think now is a good time to turn Church of God into a disambiguation page rather than a redirect to Seventh-day Adventist Church, since that church is only one of many that are the Church of God. In his 5th edition Handbook of Denominations in the United States, Mead said there were then at least 200 separate religious bodies in the United States alone that carried Church of God in its name. Most of the "Churches of God" are either Pentecostal/Holiness bodies or Adventist bodies. This is my first attempt at a disambiguation page. If it needs help, please jump in. Thanks. Rlvaughn 20:25, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation page

message: Could someone add Church of God (Restoration) to the appropriate list. Thanks --nixie 00:02, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Church of God Restoration

message: In light of two summaries on edits on the Church of God page, I'd like to offer some comments and a suggestion. Here are the comments:
*These groups DO NOT consider themselves to be Adventists, with the exception of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. Calling them Adventist is inaccurate & not a NPOV...Most in the Churches of God do not consider themselves to be Adventist but Sabbatarian. Also, I put a link to the most popular site concerning news and teachings of the Sabbatarian Churches of God.
First I would say that categorizing these churches as "Adventist" is not necessarily inserting a "non-neutral" point of view. It is categorizing them by the historical connections rather than theological viewpoints. Religious taxonomy is an inexact science, and there is no perfect way to present a quick category without explanation. The articles themselves should serve as the explanation.
A possible resolution to this problem would be to divide this and make two categories - Adventist and Sabbatarian. Then the churches could be moved to one of the appropriate categories. This move would need to be made by someone who is both knowledgable concerning these groups and able to sort them without bias. I believe I could do it without bias, but just am not knowledgable enough on these churches. That lack of knowledge is probably what created the problem to start with. - Rlvaughn 22:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I for one would be interested to see which ones arose from the Millerite Adventist movement, and believe that this would be properly encyclopedic. Colin MacLaurin 10:47, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An old version of the Millerites page does list "Church of God Adventists". Colin MacLaurin 13:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I have tried to reorganize the page.  I would appreciate a review from someone else.  Over the last several days, I have added a number of extra Wikipedia pages for groups with some variation of either a current or historical "Church of God" name.  As for organizing the various organizations, I used each group's page to guide the categorization.  Thanks for the advice on Adventist / Sabbatarian.  I let the Adventist template guide which churches went under that label.  The Sabbatarian then tended to be churches that separated from the Worldwide Church of God as it changed its theology, hence the "Armstrongism" reference.  I would greatly appreciate someone else reviewing my work. Dawynn (talk) 03:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Adventists and Sabbatarians

message: I have removed the block to the TOC, and having done so, I can see why it was removed. The opening sentence is needed to introduce the topic, and the first heading should follow directly after it. Unfortunately Wkipedia automatically inserts the TOC immediately before the first heading and after the preamble. We could get around this by placing a heading before the introductory clause, but this would look clumsy. Can we work something out? Copey 2 15:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Table of Contents