477:-- The list of doctrines included appears to me to be contrived to fit a flower POINSETIA, no doubt to contrast with the Calvinist TULIP. This is still a very recent article with one (new to WP) main author. I am far from sure what to suggest, but since this is an agglomeration of doctrines, with no very clear statement of who adheres to them all, I suspect the answer is to ask the author to produce an article on each of the 10 or so doctrines and link them to this article. I presume this to be one of several possible statements of an Arminian soteriological position. It may be possible to provide an article worth uploading, but it needs a lot more work yet.
423:. It also contains a section that presents notable endorsements AND objections (that includes supporting citations), which can be expanded upon. Overall the article give ONLY an informational overview of the topic and does not make any claims of superiority, rather it clearly lines out distinctions and positions with no promotional commentary. I would like for the User Dolsum to indicate which part of the article is "promotional" because I would be glad to revise it accordingly.
241:
viewpoint's uniqueness to other views. The article even goes to great lengths to show it's distinctions with citations. Not only is soteriological traditionalism affrimed by the largest denomination in the world (SBC's journal), but it is also expounded upon in a scholarly sense in the other citations. This view is cleary taught in tens of thousands of southern
Baptist churches, there is no reason an encyclopedic overview of the view should not be available on Knowledge.
222:. There are mentions of Soteriology and traditionalism in published sources. The selection of sources the creators have provided, additionally, seems odd. There are a couple of links to some rather dense articles published by a journal from the "Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry" but mostly they seem to rely on some rather smaller sites. That, combined with the overall structure of the article raises questions of possible
557:
we use the term "Calvinism" to address it's view of soteriology), and because the term "traditionalism," when left alone, can apply to various topics. This form of traditionalism is specifically related to the topic of soteriology so the common phrase that people use to refer to it is "Soteriological
Traditionalism."
326:
The term soteriological traditionalism means "the traditonal view of salvation" this term is derived from the "Traditonal understanding of the southern baptist view of soteriology." Perhaps this is why google struggles to find the phrase very often, it is a literary simplification of a longer phrase.
240:
The article links to the southern baptist convention's official news portal (the sbc is the largest
Protestant denomination in america). The formal theological viewpoint was consolodated in 2012 so searching google would not be the best way to determine it's legitimacy. All of the sources confirm the
556:
Furthermore, if you were to use a less technical term such a "A Traditional view of
Baptist Soteriology" it would be similar to calling Calvinism "A Calvinist view of Protestant Soteriology". The reason the term "Soteriological Traditionalism" is used it for literary simplification (in the same way
399:
With regards to the synthesis charge. Knowledge says, "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." I would like to see specifics regarding this charge. It comes across as baseless. The article presents an informational
492:
Peterkingiron, thank you for the input. I have added two in depth references in the POINSETTA sub-section. Although I am a new user, I have taught seminary classes for three years and been a Bible teacher in various churches for 8 years. I am well qualified to write on this topic. Thanks again.
414:
In response to User "Dolsum's" comment "the article raises questions of possible promotion for me" I would like to point out that the article remains neutral providing citations from major sites that support
Traditionalism such as
327:
This does not however invalidate that soteriological traditionalism is an appropriate term for the view, There is no other view that uses this title, and when the title is googled it shows results to the sbc view on
Soteriology.
183:
551:
This non-denominational seminary in
Florida has a news publication on Soteriological Traditionalism in their post titled "Calvinism, Arminianism, or Traditionalism?" It mentions the term "soteriological tradionalism" twice.
311:
Additional citations from other southern baptists resources have been provided including content describing multiple prestigious southern baptist proponents of soteriological traditionalism, along with
177:
364:
A section titled "notable endorsements and objections" has been added to the article giving clear detail on the formal nature of this theological view. Citations are included.
437:
A subsection was added in the "Traditional
Statement" section covering the "Calvinist Response" to Soteriological Traditionalism. This furthers the neutrality of the article.
276:
Additional citations from the
Southern Baptists Conventions official news portal sbc today have been added to further substantiate the legitimacy of the wiki articles content.
454:
136:
109:
104:
400:
review of the view and cites several majors sources to prove legitimacy. It is my opinion that the nominating user "Dolscum" has failed to qualify his charge properly.
113:
532:
The article presents an informational review of the view and cites several majors sources to prove legitimacy. This means the article does not qualify as " purely
536:" as Bearian implied with no examples to support his assertion. The article also includes sources that specifically use the term "Soteriological Traditionalism."
96:
143:
198:
388:
353:
300:
265:
165:
566:
545:
524:
502:
486:
466:
446:
432:
409:
392:
357:
321:
304:
269:
235:
218:
to me. Running a google search on the title pulls up very few results for the term, none of which look like they'd prove to be
159:
78:
17:
155:
100:
71:
205:
92:
84:
584:
40:
562:
541:
498:
442:
428:
405:
384:
369:
349:
332:
317:
296:
281:
261:
246:
482:
171:
558:
537:
494:
438:
424:
401:
380:
365:
345:
328:
313:
292:
277:
257:
242:
580:
36:
376:
341:
288:
253:
191:
553:
478:
231:
520:
462:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
579:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
65:
223:
215:
227:
533:
516:
512:
458:
219:
53:
130:
226:
for me. Hopefully an AFD will at least bring more eyes to bear on this article.
59:
336:
419:
and major sites that support opposing views like
Calvinism such as
573:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
554:
http://www.covenantbiblecollegeirc.com/#!news-and-events/c24vq
420:
416:
126:
122:
118:
190:
214:Nominating because the entire article looks like a
455:list of Christianity-related deletion discussions
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
587:). No further edits should be made to this page.
204:
8:
453:Note: This debate has been included in the
452:
52:. The article's subject is found to be
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
284:) 14:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
249:) 14:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
1:
372:) 14:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
93:Soteriological Traditionalism
85:Soteriological Traditionalism
335:) 14:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
604:
567:20:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
546:20:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
525:20:12, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
503:18:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
487:18:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
467:15:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
447:18:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
433:17:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
410:14:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
393:14:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
358:05:19, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
322:14:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
305:04:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
270:04:05, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
236:03:03, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
79:01:16, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
421:http://www.monergism.com/
576:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
48:The result was
534:original research
513:original research
469:
396:
379:comment added by
361:
344:comment added by
308:
291:comment added by
273:
256:comment added by
77:
56:and not notable.
595:
578:
395:
373:
360:
338:
307:
285:
272:
250:
220:reliable sources
209:
208:
194:
146:
134:
116:
74:
68:
57:
34:
603:
602:
598:
597:
596:
594:
593:
592:
591:
585:deletion review
574:
417:connect316.net/
374:
339:
286:
251:
151:
142:
107:
91:
88:
72:
66:
62:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
601:
599:
590:
589:
559:Nathankyle2188
549:
548:
538:Nathankyle2188
527:
495:Nathankyle2188
490:
489:
471:
470:
439:Nathankyle2188
425:Nathankyle2188
402:Nathankyle2188
381:Nathankyle2188
366:Nathankyle2188
346:Nathankyle2188
329:Nathankyle2188
314:Nathankyle2188
293:Nathankyle2188
278:Nathankyle2188
258:Nathankyle2188
243:Nathankyle2188
212:
211:
148:
87:
82:
60:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
600:
588:
586:
582:
577:
571:
570:
569:
568:
564:
560:
555:
547:
543:
539:
535:
531:
528:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
507:
506:
505:
504:
500:
496:
488:
484:
480:
479:Peterkingiron
476:
473:
472:
468:
464:
460:
456:
451:
450:
449:
448:
444:
440:
435:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
412:
411:
407:
403:
397:
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
371:
367:
362:
359:
355:
351:
347:
343:
337:
334:
330:
324:
323:
319:
315:
309:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
283:
279:
274:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
248:
244:
238:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
207:
203:
200:
197:
193:
189:
185:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
157:
154:
153:Find sources:
149:
145:
141:
138:
132:
128:
124:
120:
115:
111:
106:
102:
98:
94:
90:
89:
86:
83:
81:
80:
75:
69:
63:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
575:
572:
550:
529:
508:
491:
474:
436:
413:
398:
375:— Preceding
363:
340:— Preceding
325:
310:
287:— Preceding
275:
252:— Preceding
239:
213:
201:
195:
187:
180:
174:
168:
162:
152:
139:
49:
47:
31:
28:
178:free images
67:have a cup
581:talk page
511:- purely
459:• Gene93k
224:promotion
216:synthesis
37:talk page
583:or in a
389:contribs
377:unsigned
354:contribs
342:unsigned
312:sources.
301:contribs
289:unsigned
266:contribs
254:unsigned
228:Dolescum
137:View log
39:or in a
517:Bearian
475:Userify
184:WP refs
172:scholar
110:protect
105:history
509:Delete
156:Google
114:delete
61:Coffee
50:delete
199:JSTOR
160:books
144:Stats
131:views
123:watch
119:links
73:beans
54:WP:OR
16:<
563:talk
542:talk
530:Keep
521:talk
499:talk
483:talk
463:talk
443:talk
429:talk
406:talk
385:talk
370:talk
350:talk
333:talk
318:talk
297:talk
282:talk
262:talk
247:talk
232:talk
192:FENS
166:news
127:logs
101:talk
97:edit
206:TWL
135:– (
76://
70://
64://
565:)
544:)
523:)
515:.
501:)
485:)
465:)
457:.
445:)
431:)
408:)
391:)
387:•
356:)
352:•
320:)
303:)
299:•
268:)
264:•
234:)
186:)
129:|
125:|
121:|
117:|
112:|
108:|
103:|
99:|
58:—
561:(
540:(
519:(
497:(
481:(
461:(
441:(
427:(
404:(
383:(
368:(
348:(
331:(
316:(
295:(
280:(
260:(
245:(
230:(
210:)
202:·
196:·
188:·
181:·
175:·
169:·
163:·
158:(
150:(
147:)
140:·
133:)
95:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.