User talk:Tourskin/Archive7

Thank you for your welcome

Hey Tourskin, thanks for your welcome post on my talk page. I appreciate that you take the time to help new contributors. Of the pointers you put in my talk page, I particularly like The five pilars of Wikipedia, which include Wikipedia's Neutrality guidelines. I look forward to a civil interaction with you. Systematizer (talk) 00:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting Tourkins reply to on my talk talk page, which speaks for itself.

Yes, I'm sure you must have learned a great deal and realized your faults. Tourskin (talk) 01:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tourskin, you should restrict your comments to the relevant Wikipedia pages. Your comment on my talk page is gratuitous and smells of vandalism. I warn you against this sort of behavior. Quoting from No Personal Attacks:

"As a matter of polite and effective discourse, comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people."

Please stick to this rule. I propose to you that we refrain from writing on each other's talk pages and restrict our interactions to the relevant content pages that we both contribute to. Systematizer (talk) 03:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus talk page

Reverting my edit has confused me - why have you allowed such nonsense on the talk page? You know the extent to which the article gets a lot of stuff that has no relevance to improving the article.Tourskin (talk) 19:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you have allowed it on just to answer against the idea that Jesus was married and died. Still, I personally would have just removed it. Tourskin (talk) 19:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I felt it was better to give a definitive statement on what he posted as to its relation within the article, otherwise it just keeps coming and coming. Gavin Scott (talk) 19:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most Christians

Dear Tourskin, do you have any usable reference at for the Eastern Orthodox view on particular judgement? Str1977 ^(talk) 22:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the refs. However, I could not find anything specific in the first one (the Catechism) while the second one, while containing some information, is about another issue. But nonetheless I have included the second ref in the article for the moment.

As for explanation of differences, we can easily put them into the footnotes as well.

Cheers, Str1977 ^(talk) 08:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you have a look at what Ambrosius is doing on "Christianity" and help me curtailing his disruptive edits? Str1977 ^(talk) 17:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Christianity

Hi. I've moved one of your contributions from the RfC section into the section above, as it didn't appear to relate to the subject of the RfC, so I assumed it was misplaced. I thought it courteous to let you know in case I've missed its relevance to the RfC. All the best. SP-KP (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wrong quote

hi, I understand your frustration, which I shre, but quotes have to be correct:

I wrote: The early Fathers of the Church, Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and others all talked about judgement and hell.Ludwig Ott, Grundriß der Dogmatik, Herder, Freiburg, 1965, p. 571f

Now this source Ludwig Ott, Grundriß der Dogmatik, Herder, Freiburg, 1965, p. 571f is used by STR1977 and you to show that Catholics believe in Particular Judgement. Why? There is no relation to it! --Ambrosius007 (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was more Ambrosius sourced with that. I put it on the talk page. The Fathers sentence I took out completely because it is of no consequence to the section topic. Str1977 ^(talk) 18:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you... left a message on the belief page...

Shir-El too 20:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neat person

I just went through your user page info - you seem like a very unique and interesting person with very unique and interesting language skills, background and interests. NancyHeise (talk) 06:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should be a priest. NancyHeise (talk) 01:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tourskin, I know several priests, the desire to have a family does not go away, it is something you choose to give up in order to follow God's invitation - it is a sacrifice - and something that makes a person's prayers loud and acceptable to God. I have a priest friend I love very much and for whom I pray for often. I was subtitute teaching one day at my kids school (Catholic) about six years ago and was on a break. I went to visit the Blessed Sacrament in the Church and while I was walking down the aisle to go sit in a pew, I had a profound religious experience of Jesus say to me "Honor your father" - the meaning to me was quite clear, he was telling me to honor my spiritual father, this priest. I have met several more people who consider this priest their spiritual father and I truly believe that when Jesus told his apostles that whoever gives up something, including wife and children to follow God's call, will receive much more - he was not kidding. I wrote a corny poem once when I gave a gift to our parish priests on Father's Day but it sums up for me the true meaning of being someone's father:

"Who can deserve it? I don't suppose I knows.. the name of "Father" more, than he who father's souls." If you are wondering who is the special priest that I love and pray for, who Jesus told me to "honor", his name is Fr. Arthur Dennison, he is the pastor of Church of the Little Flower in Coral Gables, Florida [1]. He speaks five languages, does quite a lot to help the poor in Miami and abroad, and has been a priest for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami for over 35 years. He is a very sweet, humble and holy person, a heterosexual man who gave up the possibility of having a wife and children to follow God's call, and has done a tremendous job throughout.NancyHeise (talk) 19:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This [2] priest of the Archdiocese of Miami is also a cardiologist. It seems that a lot of the new priests coming out of the seminaries, are men who have had another career before giving in to God's call. One of the priests, I think in the Palm Beach Diocese is a widowed grandfather. Regarding lust - all people have sexual desire - when you get married it does not go away. Homosexual people have sexual desire, unmarried people have sexual desire, it is part of being in a human body. You think that only priests have to figure out how to be celibate? No. We are all called to chasitity and the Church teaches us ways to turn that desire into something useful. Instead of fantasizing about someone you love and find sexually attractive, try praying for that person instead. What really helps someone's soul is love. Love is what makes your prayer to God loud. We will never be ashamed for keeping God's commandment to love. It is how we express that love that determines if we are helping or harming that person's soul. I have another priest friend who was engaged to be married before he gave in to God's call. Did he stop loving this woman? Perhaps he is helped to be a good priest because he has a woman who loves him and prays for his success in doing God's will. I believe that is what Mother Mary and Mary Magdalene and the other women did for the disciples after the death and resurrection of Jesus. I think that the disciples would not have been able to fulfill their duties if they did not have the women doing their duty praying for them and for those they were ministering to. I think that is why Jesus did not give the priesthood to women, they have an equally important and complimentary role to the priests. We love them in prayer and are given duties "connected with spreading the Gospel". St. Bernard of Clarivaux wrote to the Countess of Brittany "Whereever I go, I feel you close to me. Just go to the bottom of your heart and you will find mine." I saw a TV show about a seminary and the vocations director was asked what he looked for in a potential seminarian. He said he wanted to know if the man had ever been in love, that he felt it was important for a priest to experience this. I think that whenever we follow God's call, he rewards us with love - in the greatest degree and satisfaction. St. Teresa of Avila also made this observation. So my prayer for you is to not be afraid to follow God's call, he will help you through it if you put your trust in him.

I am not sure if I am a qualified person to answer your question. I think you need to ask God that question and see what he thinks. I will do what I know I can do for you - to pray for you to know God's will. NancyHeise (talk) 00:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God bless you too! NancyHeise (talk) 00:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Church

Sin is sin, doesn't really matter how much you do it. We are all sinners, we are all scum. It's by God's Grace that we have any hope of salvation. I just don't see where a hierarchy comes into play. Like I don't have a personal problem with people who are Catholic, they're just people. I have a problem with the things I've seen about that church, and the whole concept it believes in. I'm into pentecostalism, so I likely have different views to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbins11 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just have one thing to say about that. I realise that the pope can be corrupt like any other person. But I just want to say. What about the people that Jesus drew alongside, who were the lowest of the low, and he allowed them to serve him. I beleive that we are unworthy to sort of associate with the Father directly, but He acts as a medium through which we can fellowship with and serve God. There is no need for another. You know what I mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbins11 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I do not wish to argue with you further. I just wish to tell you that you should forget the false teachings of Catholicism and save your soul. Read this: http://www.atruechurch.info/catholicism.html I'll be praying for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbins11 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About before (from Mongoose)

I was not objecting to your expression of religious belief. Far from it. Rather, I felt that the way you responded to Moria was unnecessary because I didn't see anything particularly wrong with his small statement (and you did, as you've said). Perhaps, in accordance to Wikipedia principles, you are correct. However, I don't see the need to object to relatively innocuous statements like Moria's. Nautical Mongoose (talk) 00:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've likely done that a number of times, too. Hopefully, things will go smoother in the future. Nautical Mongoose (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism report

• The Angry link leads to a deleted image.
• I think you got the political correctness the wrong way around.
• This probably qualifies as soapboxing and might either be deleted or used against you eventually.
  • Why isn't Russia on that list? Is Turkey, on the other hand, that bad?
  • I find it ironic that the only ideology that promises equality for all is the one you oppose the most. ;-)
• It would probably make sense to wikilink some of the less commonly known things. --Illythr (talk) 18:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Soapboxing: There's a heap of other stuff for people to do on Wikipedia than poking around other people's userspace. However, in a possible conflict, especially on religious matters, this will be used against you. I personally have nothing against these things, because they make the POV guessing (the only real reason people visit userpages) much simpler, than when you have to guess about babel boxes and stuff.

Politics: Two quotes (democracy, more or less):

• "Vote, v. The instrument and symbol of a freeman's power to make a fool of himself and a wreck of his country." (c The Devil's Dictionary)
• ..."Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (c - so famous, there's no need to (c) anymore...)

Religion: not really my field of expertise, I suppose... --Illythr (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wise to remember that verse

Mark 9:40 is a scripture that I have always valued; it teaches me to that He is the Father of truth and knows His own. Christians too often focus on that which is different rather than that which binds. Is any doctrine or belief greater than Jesus crucified, resurrected, and sitting on the right hand of the Father? To me, there is no greater truth and nothing more essential in Christian belief; if that belief exists in another, then I have found a brother or sister in Christ Jesus. I do not advocate that all truth is not important, rather I advocate for what is the greatest truth. Let us discuss the nature of God, his unfailing mercy, his commandments, his Grace, how we worship God, and all that is God, but nothing transcends the overwhelming power of an individual knowing that Jesus was crucified on their behalf, that he rose the third day, that he returned to sit on the right hand of the Father, and that he will return again. Thanks for asking; His peace be with you.--Storm Rider ^(talk) 14:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Regarding the template you put on my talk page, I responded there that it sounds like it is describing you. :) Hope all is well. NancyHeise ^talk 00:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God be with you

You are doing a lot of good for this website and everyone who reads your comments and kind words. Thank you for your tireless effort for Christ and truth. "The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few."--User: Uriah is Boss 21:12, 21 August 2008

Having your account renamed

Please don't move your userpages to a different account name. If you want your account to be renamed, feel free to request this at WP:RENAME. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Manzikert

I can't put the Seljuk flag on the infobox of the battle. Can you help me? --Ioannes Tzimiskes (talk) 11:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Τheir flag depicted an archer in blue background i think.That was what i had in mind. --Ioannes Tzimiskes (talk) 10:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Christianity

Your edits to that page are coming awful close to personal attacks on me and others because of my religious beliefs. How ironic, actually... Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 00:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for any incivility that you might have felt. The subject is slightly touchy for me, and I guess I just failed to stay cool when the editing got hot. Anyways, I hope you can forgive me and I look forward to working with you in the future. Nice new username, by the way. :) Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 00:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

totally unrelated to any subject

I just saw this neat story about the pope on CNS here [3] and wondered if it could be used on some page - what do you think? Maybe the Columbia or FARC pages? NancyHeise ^talk 18:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus and BC/AD vs BCE/CE

Hello again Tourskin!

As we both know there was a "consensus" to put on the Jesus talk page BC/BCE and AD/CE. However, according to WP:SEASON this form is not allowed, we must either go with the traditional dating system or the modern one. What do you prefer? (In the meantime I have edited the article so that it goes along with Convention/Policy). Gavin Scott (talk) 12:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What would Jesus do? Gavin (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is better to have no House of God than a House of God filled with sin. :) Onward! To the Lord! Gavin (talk) 18:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is true, however we have to be careful where we let this biblical analysis take us...before we get too "blessed are the meek..." haha, seriously though I think that the article needs to go one way or the other- it just looks silly. Gavin (talk) 18:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's hoping we find some consensus.

Gavin (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Gavin (talk) 18:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece August 2008 newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the WikiProject Greece newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Give it a rest

I just don't care that much about your article to bother, so please just let it go. I was simply trying to stop what I saw as an injustice; removing a tag for the wrong reasons. The tag was never placed there for the reason you assumed.

And your assumption that I know nothing about Christians is just that. I grew up evangelical Church of Christ (NOT the NCoC), and I had never heard of the YEC silliness until after I'd left the church as an adult. Nice try though, but I'm afraid not all non-Christians are alike either. Aunt Entropy (talk) 05:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Assyrians in the United Kingdom

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Assyrians in the United Kingdom, 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 should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you removed the deletion template. Thanks for the comment on my talk page, which I addressed there. Could I ask where you got the information for the article from? It currently has no sources (apart from one for the population figure, which as far as I can tell does not support the 5,000 figure given). Cordless Larry (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any luck finding a reference? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

Hey Gabr-el I was wondering why I haven't heard any replies from you lately. It would be good to hear from you again. I hope I haven't offended you in any way. Sherif9282 (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hi

Well, I'm a little afraid that brining Europe together will cause all of the smaller cultures to die out, which I do not want to see. That is my main reason.-Red4tribe (talk) 22:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail reply

My e-mail reply was a bit long so I have posted it on my discussion page. Sherif9282 (talk) 12:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Et cetera

Hello, Gabr-el. I just want to let you know that I have changed all the dates in the Jesus article to BC/AD, as the manual of style advocates for choosing one or the other, and the Jesus-based dates seem more appropriate for the Jesus article. Also, might I suggest changing the links in you sig to reflect your current username? The links are still for the Tourskin name. Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 20:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the troll on my talkpage

I see he's bothering you as well...if it wasn't past my bedtime I'd report him to AN/I. FWIW he is MsTopeka/Nukeh et al., blocked indefinitely in the latest incarnation (first listed). If you have the inclination and energy, please make a report, and have that IP blocked for a stretch. I'd appreciate it if you can... Best, Aunt Entropy (talk) 05:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you and me

now that some time has passed and we can safely assume any hot tempers have cooled, there is something I have been meaning to bring up. If this upsets you I beg you simply to ignore it as this is I promise you not my intention. It is clear to me that when I suggested on the Jesus talk page that you take a break, you took that as an insult, perhaps because you thought I thought you were to blame for any conflict. I can see how anyone could have interpreted it that way and I did not mean for you to interpret it that way and I apologize for having been unclear. I want to ask of you a favor: please try to consider the possibility that one could have suggested you take a break in a entirely different spirit, for different reasons, with different motives. If you just don't see it, there is nothing more I can say except I am sorry if you thought my remark hurtful. But I hope you can see that it could have been offered in a very different spirit. Slrubenstein | Talk 14:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]