Talk:List of evangelical Christians

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

C. S. Lewis[edit]

I'm not disputing that C.S. Lewis was an evangelical, but in what sense can he be regarded as a Calvinist? Also, has it been decided whether or not to include Catholics - or am I opening up a whole can of worms? Joey1898 23:15, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal "born-again Christian laypeople" --> "evangelical Christians"[edit]

Please discuss merger here.

Support[edit]

I hope that California2's intent here isn't that a potential merge would somehow reduce the requirement to conform with WP:V and WP:NOR by providing proper citation of any included name. Whether or not a merge occurs, evidentiary standards remain crucial. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 06:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion regarding the constant bickering on the other article,over the definition of born again.Nothing to do with citations.On the other article I have added citations where none was given or where others have lamented that they could not find citations.For this reason I do not understand the above assumption.California12 10:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for making a false assumption, California12. My own experience of "bickering" was mostly where I had asked for a citation that so-and-so was born-again, and only been told that it was "obvious", or "well-known in evangelical circles", or something else less than WP:V. But none of that was with you. I actually do not recall any particular discussion over the meaning of "born-again" at the List of born-again Christian laypeople (though it might have happened on other pages, of course... or maybe I just didn't pay attention to it). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 19:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose[edit]

  • Oppose In many ways "evangelical Christian" is a term that should probably die out as it's misleading or potentially confusing. Most Christian denominations encourage their clergy or scholars to be evangelical in least in some sense. (Exemptions being some Eastern Christians and Amish or Hutterite groups) There's potential of enormous overlap with other lists as numerous Lutheran churches call themselves Evangelical and even with Quakers there is the Evangelical Friends International. Although I guess I could tolerate it as something like "List of Evangelical Christianity adherents" with the explanation that I imagine is already here.--T. Anthony 05:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't see how "List of Evangelical Christianity adherents" is any better. To define "Evangelical Christianity" as something different from "Christians who are evangelical" is to do original research. Your point about Lutherans and Quakers is moot - if they're not Christians, they don't overlap, if they are, there's no problem. ··gracefool |☺ 06:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • You have a point. I just oppose in general then. There already is a List of Baptists, List of U.S. televangelists, List of televangelists in Brazil, and List of preachers. Evangelism and preaching is already dealt with and merging "born agains" would be merging different phenomenon. To be specific to the merger "Born again" is, oddly enough, a better name for a list as it describes a terminology only a minority of Christians use so is more specific. I know you believe most Christians consider themselves "born again Christians", but this is wrong. The majority of the world's Christians are of denominations who practice paedo-baptism and so rarely if ever use words like "born again" to describe themselves even if it's used during infant baptism and in certain other technical situations. Anyway the thing I meant about overlap is that there already is a List of Lutherans and List of Quakers, so listing members of Evangelical Lutheran or Quaker denominations is redundant.--T. Anthony 07:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm convinced by T. Anthony's explanations that the merger would just create more confusion about inclusion than it would help to clarify any list membership and criteria. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 07:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Woa, I didn't mean to do that good. If a definition could be created of what this even means, that would also apply to people commonly called born-agains, I could maybe change my mind. On the whole though I think I'd prefer these issues be on denominational lists. Although this would anger some I think I'd favor more denominational lists in order to deal with other groups who often call their members "born again" or capital E "Evangelicals."--T. Anthony 08:33, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Look, not wanting to rabbit on for ages, it's kind of hard to merge any article on Evangelicals and "born-again Christians" because you're talking about two completely different kettles of fish. A born again Christian could be of any stance theologically and thus can not be merged with a discussion on Evangelicals. This would effectively undermine the intellectual stance of the Evangelical Doctrine. --Nick0 17:47, 13 February 2006 (AEDT)

Neutral[edit]

  • I am leaning towards support, but I initially just want to comment that if this is done, this page should be organized into section along the lines of "People known mainly for their evangelical activity" / "People notable for other reasons who have professed belief in evangelism". Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 07:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC) Move to oppose.[reply]
That's the idea (see Talk:List of born-again Christian laypeople#Interestedness and NPOV) ··gracefool |☺ 23:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Antolìn Tovar[edit]

Who is him? 201.74.182.183 00:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Harper , the current prime minister[edit]

Stephen Harper, the PM of Canada, should not be on the same list as Billy Graham. This is very misleading. THe PM's personal religous views do not make him a "contemporary evangelical movement leader." It is not even certain that the PM is an evangelical (as opposed to simply protestant). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.68.68.144 (talk) 15:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Missing![edit]

The number notable Christian authors missing is staggering! How could you list Christian authors, missing the following:

Thomas Merton, C.S. Lewis, Richard Foster, A.W. Tozer, Andrew Murray, Blaise Pascal, Soren Kierkegaard, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Thomas A. Kempis.

This is a short list, right off the top of my head. Further, there should be some mention of their most notable works, there by justifying their inclusion in the list.


Also, The list of notable contemporary Christians leaves out Christians of color. The church is still probably the most segregated institution in America, on Sunday morning. That division should not be carried on, on the internet. T.D. Jakes, Dr. Tony Evans, Paul Yongi Cho, and others are notable by their absence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hegaveitall (talk • contribs) 21:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)Hegaveitall (talk) 21:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right off the top of my head, Thomas Merton, C.S. Lewis, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, and Thomas A. Kempis were not "evangelical" in the sense of this list, as in: belonging to the Protestant Christian movement which began in Great Britain in the 1730s. -- Secisek (talk) 19:47, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evangeline Lily? Anyone watch LOST? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.165.124 (talk) 02:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing? There may be about 550 million Evangelical Christians in the world in 2010 of which 92 million are in the USA (source "Operation World" Jason Mandryk 2010). I would make three points from this. 1. The list should get a lot longer, especially the "Contemporary" section. 2. The list should contain more people from outside the USA than within it. 3. Given the global nature of Evangelical Christianity it would be best if almost all entries include some indication of country or region. e.g. Gregory Beale, former president of the Evangelical Theological Society, USA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisMaynard3 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleanup[edit]

Need to add Added Ἀλήθεια 19:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC):[reply]

Ἀλήθεια 18:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are many people on this list that don't have any explanation as to why they are notable within Evangelicalism. I've cleaned up a bunch, and will continue to work down the list as time permits. Ἀλήθεια 20:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable additions[edit]

This list should contain only entries which are notable enough to warrant an article in Wikipedia. Red-linked entries, as well as non-linked entries, should be promptly removed. In addition, entries with nothing to indicate why they are included should be either clarified or removed. Thank you, Ἀλήθεια, for helping to organize this list and clean it up to the point you have. HokieRNB 05:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal not vandalism[edit]

A recent IP editor removed the following names:

Although the edit was summarily reverted as "vandalism", I'm not sure I would be so quick to judge. I would be interested in hearing the rationale behind the anonymous editor's removal. It may have been a completely good faith effort to remove individuals who many might not consider "evangelical". I would also be inclined to look closely at the wikipedia page to see if they are clearly identified there as evangelical, and if not, then see if any reliable sources identify them as evangelical. If not, I would support their removal from this list. HokieRNB 23:43, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change article name[edit]

This article's name is ridiculous. Are we going to list all several hundred million evangelical Christians? Something like "List of prominent evangelical Christians" is much more appropriate. ~ Hairouna (talk) 12:13, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Only the ones with articles on Wikipedia. Just like other lists only list the notable ones. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's not at all obvious, but this is not really a "list of evangelical Christians". It's a "list of Wikipedia articles about evangelical Christians". Maproom (talk) 21:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How were they excluded, included?[edit]

In?

Ronald Reagan [1]

Out?

Jim Bakker Paul Crouch Creflo Dollar Billy James Hargis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Activist (talk • contribs) 19:01, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reagan was not know as a prominent evangelical although he appealed to them. The first two are clearly evangelicals. I'm not sure what your objection to the last two are. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:20, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Walter Görlitz: It seems I wasn't sufficiently clear. I didn't know why Reagan, who spent very little time in church and did not promote an evangelical agenda, was listed as one. Hargis was very clearly a prominent evangelical, so I couldn't understand why his name didn't appear on the list, unless it was solely because of his turbulent history, much as Haggard's name had been erased in the past. While Dollar's notoriety is for his "Prosperity Gospel" theme, he seems to fit the definition.[2] (feel free to erase these references)

References

  1. ^ http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/christian-conservatives-have-a-very-selective-memory-of-ronald-reagan/
  2. ^ The Best Thing About Evangelist Creflo Dollar Is His Audience, Andrew Lavallee, August 14, 2001. Retrieved April 2, 2018.

Article cleanup started[edit]

I have removed multiple individuals who were included but whose wikipedia article makes no mention of evangelicalism. I presume there are many others on this list because they are "famous" "Christians", but who don't meet the basic criteria of "notable due to their influence on the popularity or development of Evangelical Christianity or for their professed Evangelicalism." Until and unless their individual articles make that notability clear, I propose to remove them from this list. Ἀλήθεια 12:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ἀλήθεια: I would be wary of such a clean-up as many denominations are evangelical and so the latter term is assumed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would point to the stated criteria for this list, which is that the individual is "notable due to their influence ... or for their professed Evangelicalism." (Emphasis mine.) The sheer number of evangelical Christians who are notable for other reasons would make the scope of this list completely unmanageable. For instance, I just restored Tim Keller, who even though he shuns the label, has been identified by reliable sources as "an influential evangelical" (see Engaging with Keller: Thinking Through the Theology of an Influential Evangelical). Simply being identified as a member of a denomination that calls itself evangelical is not in my opinion sufficient notability for inclusion in this list. Ἀλήθεια 11:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

non-Evangelicals should be removed from this list[edit]

For instance, Joel Osteen does not meet the basic criteria for inclusion in this article. He does not identify as evangelical, and does not profess an evangelical faith and is rejected by evangelicals as heretical. Ἀλήθεια 05:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't or you indicated that he does not in his article? It's not a straight line, but we know that Osteen preaches a prosperity Gospel (see https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/9/1/15951874/prosperity-gospel-explained-why-joel-osteen-believes-prayer-can-make-you-rich-trump) and others. It is on the borders of Evangelicalism. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
After 2 weeks, no one had come to the defense of identifying Osteen with evangelicalism, so I have removed him from this list. Ἀλήθεια 12:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
After two weeks no one has come to support your claims either and WP:STATUSQUO applies. I will continue to restore him until you offer proof that he is not an evangelical as I have offered proof that he is. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:10, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And for the record, I'm not sure why Osteen is being singled-out to be removed among all of the other preachers of the prosperity gospel or those who espouse prosperity theology. Seems biased and far from WP:NPOV. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not looking for an edit war, but I feel like your logic is backward. Wouldn't it make more sense that the burden of proof would be on the person to demonstrate that he *is* evangelical or, more appropriately, that reliable sources agree that he is in some way notable due to his influence on the popularity or development of evangelical Christianity or for his professed evangelicalism? (That is directly ripped from the definition of the list.) I've periodically gone through this list and removed people for whom no such claim is made on their wiki article, and usually haven't been met with much resistance on this notion. Lack of evidence has typically been sufficient to simply remove him. Why have I singled him out? Because someone changed the name from "John Osteen" (the founder and first pastor of the church now led by son Joel) and I reverted that. Then I proceeded to remove John from the list because he wasn't really ever identified with evangelicalism. Then you came along and reverted both edits, thereby effectively restoring inaccurate information (twice). Bare minimum, the information should be correct. If you think Joel Osteen should be included, then at least provide a correct description for him. If you think his father John should be included, then please explain your rationale here. I contend neither belong in this list. Ἀλήθεια 21:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you do not want an edit war, but I have provided sources to show that 1) Osteen is in the camp of the prosperity theology, and 2) that prosperity theology is in the (fringe) camp of evangelicalism. That would support the idea that Osteen is, to some extent an evangelical. While he is not an excellent example, neither are all other entries. Again, no other entries are sourced and so I find it odd that you're singling out one entry in such a way. If you want to add his father back, fine. If you don't want him included but he has an article, I have no problems excluding per WP:STATUSQUO. If you would like to open a dialog about moving all proponents of prosperity theology to a new list, I would support that (as they are all fringe, but it would treat them all the same way). If you want to open a discussion about sourcing all entries, I would be OK with that. However, if you just want to ignore the source I provided and keep pushing back at my claims, I will not continue to engage. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:07, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I support moving all proponents of prosperity theology to a new list. I am also open to the idea that inclusion on this list should be reserved for those for whom explicit claims related to evangelicalism are made in their article. The thing that I have tried to reiterate here is that the standard for inclusion in this list is not that the individual is or claims to be an evangelical. It is that their evangelicalism or influence on it is notable. I will grant that for many on this list, that is not the case. However, (and I'm a little embarrassed to admit this) I'm not excited about putting forth the effort to actually do the work to vet them all. Bare minimum, this list cannot continue to make the errant claim that Joel is the "founder and first pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas". I'll also take this opportunity to thank you personally, Walter. I have always seen your work as forthright and uncontentious. Grace and peace be with you. Ἀλήθεια 12:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We should inform the Christianity Project for wider discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:18, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_evangelical_Christians&oldid=1203641605"