Talk:Evangelicalism

message: Hello . I noticed that you have removed criticism of the financial abuses by religious leaders. However, it has been there for many years. This section being neutral and very well referenced, this action looks like to Wikipedia:Vandalism. Also, as Wikipedia:Criticism#Philosophy,_religion,_or_politics explains, “For topics about a particular point of view – such as philosophies (Idealism, Naturalism, Existentialism), political outlooks (Capitalism, Marxism), or religion (Islam, Christianity, Atheism) – it will usually be appropriate to have a "Criticism" section”. See also Christianity#Criticism. Finally, it is an academic, encyclopedic and social responsibility, to denounce financial abuses by religious leaders in order to help people to identify them and specially to avoid new victims. This is what Jesus Christ has done many times in his ministry, including denouncing the love of money (Mammon) and the hypocrisy of religious leaders who devour the house of widows (Luke 20:47). Thanks for your help. My best wishes of peace and love (Wikipedia:WikiLove).--Nathan B2 (talk) 18:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure of vandalism, but definitely not adhering to a neutral point of view. I appreciate the revert. —Confession0791 talk 03:22, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

text: Hmmm...looking at the context, the removal was definitely not vandalism. And certainly the criticism section looks like a dumping ground for isolated incidents that are WP:COATRACK rather than comprehensive criticisms about evangelicalism as a movement. I agree that much of it, currently, deals with Pentecostals, which proves the point that the section needs to trimmed downed to actual criticisms of evangelicalism as a movement or moved to more appropriate articles like criticism of religion. Evangelicalism is a broad spectrum of denominations, and the little mismanagement or failings of any one denomination is not really reflective of evangelicalism as a whole - any more than the failings of any one government is a criticism of "government" as a whole. Better sources should be selected for this section. Ramos1990 (talk) 17:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: There seems to be an increasing phenomenon of people self-identifying as "evangelical", but in actuality they only go to church a few times a year or not at all. This could represent as much as 40% of those who think of themselves as evangelicals. I think the article should eventually incorporate this phenomenon. There are sources such as https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2022/august-web-only/church-attendance-sbc-southern-evangelicals-now-lapsed.html and https://relevantmagazine.com/faith/church/new-data-suggests-over-40-percent-of-self-identified-evangelicals-attend-church-once-a-year-or-less/ --Westwind273 (talk) 06:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evangelicals who don't go to church 

message: "In 1882, in the American Baptist Churches USA. In the Assemblies of God of the United States, since 1927. In 1965, in the National Baptist Convention, USA. In 1969, in the Progressive National Baptist Convention. In 1975, in The Foursquare Church."
Just putting this here so I remember it when I'm back on it computer. Dgndenver (talk) 05:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence fragments 

message: From the "Beliefs" section:
"a gift from God and a component of a Christian marriage harmonious"
Christian marriage harmonious or harmonious Christian marriage.  Is this normally expressed in the in reverse (like spanish)? 70.89.80.221 (talk) 19:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjective-noun reversal