Talk:Religion in the Philippines/Archive 1

Islam
For some reason Islam is omitted here. MrOakes (talk) 21:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)MrOakes
 * I will do my best to restore the original Islam section within the day.--Jondel (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

The entry in Islam was duplicated. I cannot edit it, hence I'm logging into the discussion page OnesimusUnbound (talk) 02:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sheesh! Thanks for noticing. I'm correcting this. Please wait out the protection expiration. --Jondel (talk) 03:58, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * And thanks for fixing this. It appears that I'm responsible for the duplication, which I perpetuated by reverting this editwhere an anonymous editor removed a section headed Islam without explanation. Apparently, I reverted it after looking at the diffs and didn't check the article itself. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Your intentions were good. I accidentally created the original duplication in my haste.--Jondel (talk) 02:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Roman Catholicism
1987 Philippine Constitution ARTICLE III BILL OF RIGHTS Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

'''== The Philippines & East Timor are not the only one's that has dominant Christian population. ==''' South Korea is the 3rd nation in East Asia that has a large Christian population.

Dominant means majority. South Korea's Christians is only 29.3% of its total population. Jbvillarante (talk) 06:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC) ===WRONG 2009 encarta === Christianity has already climbed to 41 %. what's amazing about the growth of in the percentage of Asians that are Christians is that it is the result of people in those countries converting not high birth rates of people who are already Christian or Christians moving from other countries (like what happens with islam).

Kitab
The Book of Beliefs in which ancient "Himalayos" [Filipinos in modern day] used as primary book of faith and relegion. Some Elders says it is tabulated in many forms for distribution and some others said it was translated into "Kufu". Some clans of "Muru-Suluanos" use this kufu as amulet, A leash with knoted like beeds, worn in the waist line, till now it is existed in Jolo-Sulo.

Kitab have 3major parts at 12minor parts. a. The "Tora" Law of God teachings of humility and humanity. b. The "Enil" Teachings and Law of importance of life, Creation and recreation of any living-things in The Earth. c, The "En'ki" Teaching and Law of Destruction, War and Army. d. The 12 "Emblongs" a oval shape of stone. Teachings of all mechanism of agricultural and etc. It was said Kitab had been destroyed by the ["Kalahi"] kalahi is an ancient term for foreigners. by modern day kalahi=is equivqalent to ancient term kaanak, kaangkan, kaampung. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mightyjoyang (talk • contribs) 04:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Tribal Traditional Prayers. Visayan: for fishing and sailing.

Amahan, Bathala sa kalangitan, kayutaan, ug katubigan, Himala nimo among gihanglan...... ans so on.

Muslim Tribe-Suluanos: Amah, Tuhan sin katan, naglando langit,tubig iban lupa............ and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mightyjoyang (talk • contribs) 04:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Calm down!
If you specify areas of bias and discrimination, it would be easy to maintain neutrality!--Jondel 13:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to wikipedia for its responsible implementation of neutrality in every article of this web site.
A million thanks to wikipedia. You guys are always teaching the bad vandals to obey the moral rules regarding I.T use."THANK YOU".

Atheism and agnosticism section
I have just severely modified the assertions in this section. The article previously sais, "There is a growing population of atheists and agnostics living in the Philippines. They make up about 10.9% of the total population, but it is increasingly growing.", citing ''Zuckerman, Phil. "Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns ", The Cambridge Companion to Atheism, ed. by Michael Martin, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK 2005), p 53'' in support. I looked online at page 53 of the 2007 edition, and found: "According to Inglehart et al. (2004), Barret et aL. (2001), the 1999 Gallup International Poll, and Johnstone (1993), less than 1 percent of those in Indonesia, Bangladesh, Brunei, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Iran, Malasia, Nepal, Laos, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Philippines are nonbeleivers in God. While I was at it, I fleshed out the cite and updated it to provide links to the 2007 edition. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 02:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

very biased article, how can you not include a sentence saying by far the majority are Christians ?
any other country that was at least 90 % member of one faith group would have overemphasize it. i'm not going write it though because I didn't create this page, I'm not a member of the select wikipedia editors group, and so it would probably be deleted within a day. i hope someone has the courage to include that in the article. Christianity might be even bigger in the Phillipines than most western countries. I think most of the Christians are Catholics but the protestant community is growing very fast. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.238.92 (talk) 22:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

the writer is very biased or very forgetful!
notice how the writer of this article talks about every religion in the philippinnes or however it is spelled but not about is lam, i mean come on, each religion has a header except for islam, and it is the second largest religiong in the country! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.142.37.182 (talk) 18:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I will do my best to restore the original Islam section within the day.--Jondel (talk) 01:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
The article is being vandalized and thus protected. There are recent attempts to remove the Islamic section. The protection will be removed in 2 weeks time. I will being monitoring this and placing protection as appropriate as vandlism occurs. --Jondel (talk) 00:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

90% and 70% Christian
The CIA's The World Factbook has the following figures: Catholic 82.9% (Roman Catholic 80.9%, Aglipayan 2%), Muslim 5%, Evangelical 2.8%, Iglesia ni Kristo 2.3%, other Christian 4.5%, other 1.8%, unspecified 0.6%, none 0.1% (2000 census)

The Japanese study has the following figures and is more recent: 71.5% Roman Catholic, 11% irreligious, 3.2% Muslims, 1.8% Protestant Christians, 2.5% Buddhists, and the remaining 12.6% unknown. (2006 survey)

I personally would trust The World Factbook figures more, but is it out-of-date? I don't really care which values should be put in, but the article needs to be consistent. At the beginning of the article, it's saying there are 73.3% Christians ± 12.6% from the unknowns, yet at the body, the number becomes 90%. Which should be used?--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   03:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Please also see WP:V and WP:DUE. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * There are two sources. Both saying different things, both are used in the article and contradicting each other. I'm asking which one to use, not advocating one over the other. I know the policies thank you very much. --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   05:35, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Sigh, apologies for being brusque, but pointing out policies I already am very familiar with doesn't help. We need to reach a consensus on which source to use. The status quo of glaring contradictions in the article isn't serving anyone.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   05:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * ((ec)) I see that the CIA Factbook info is from the 2000 census, and the info from the Japanese source is vintage 2006.
 * says (as of 2009) that over 90% of the population was Christian, mainly Roman Catholic.
 * says (as of 2007) about 83& Roman Catholic, 9% Protestant.
 * says that according to the National Statistics Office, approximately 93 percent of the population is Christian. Roman Catholics, the largest religious group, constitute 80 to 85 percent of the total population.
 * says (as of 2007) that around 81% are Roman catholic and 11% belong to other Christian churches.
 * says (as of 2005) that about 93% of the population was Christian.
 * (as of 2006) gives figures from cited academic sources for Christians in the 90ish percent range for years in the 1980s and 1990s.
 * says (as of 2004) that 90% of the population were professing Christianity.
 * says (as of 2011) that 77 million were Christian out of a population of 85 million (90.6%).
 * said (in 2007) that in 1997 91.5% of the population was Christian.
 * said in 2011 that as of then approximately 85% of the population were Christian.
 * said (in 2005) that the Philippines was 93% Christian.
 * said in 2003 that the Philippines was 91% Christian.
 * said in 2009 that the Philippines was 88% Christian.
 * said in 2008 that 81% of the population were Roman Catholic and 10% adherants of other Christian denominations.
 * said in 2010 that the philippines was 83& Roman Catholic and 8% Protestant.
 * said (as of 1997) that 92% of Filipinos were christian.
 * said in 2011 that according to the census in 2000 80.9% were Roman Catholic and 11.6% other Christian denominations.
 * said in 2002 that according to the 1990 census 85% were Roman catholic and 8.7% were of other Christian denominations.
 * said in 2011 that the Philippines was 80% Roman Catholic.
 * It appears to me that the figures in the Japanese source are overwhelmed by the weight of other contradicting figures. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, seems so. So should it be removed and replaced with something else?--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   05:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I would say so. I probably should have done that in the time I took putting together the above info. I've run myself out of time, though -- gotta pack, and I'll be traveling tomorrow. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll do it. I'll use the CIA source as it's the only one in the bunch that also includes figures of other religions. Cheers and have a safe trip.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   06:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Recent edit re Religion and the Philippine constitution
This comment follows on this edit. I have no problem with the edit, but the edit summary put me off. That reads, "Catholic Church: Possibly contentious. Even though it states it's the de facto, Consti. officially removed RC as the state religion."

Neither the current 1987 constitution nor any earlier Philippine constitution states that any particular religion is the de-facto religion of the Philippines. If the Catholic Church was officially the state church of the Philippines under Spanish rule (I suspect that it might have been, but would need to research that to nail it down), section 5 of the Philippine Organic Act (1902) would have disestablished such a church/state relationship. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:34, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * That ES was mine. The Philippine Organic Act of 1902 disestablished RC as the state religion thus I assume that RC was the state religion before such Act was passed. I admit that it was an oversight on my part to claim that Consti. officially removed RC as the state religion because it never stated such (I only realized it now...my apologies); the POA 1902 did. The 1987 Consti. though provides that the state has no official religion. It was my discretion to remove the de facto religion statement given that it was unsourced, possibly contentious (I believe not everyone subscribes to such belief even if the majority of the PH population is Catholic), and will probably lead to edit wars in the future.


 * In a nutshell, everyone who comes across this article would have probably read that the country's dominant religion is RC, but I don't think it's necessary to place that the de facto religion is RC or any similar statement for that matter. Xeltran (talk) 05:25, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I just picked this nit because I wasn't sure whether or not there might have been a misunderstanding here. I agree that the unsupported assertion re RC which the edit removed does not belong in the article.


 * The POA 1902 said, "Be it enacted ... That no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, and that the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed." The 1987 constitution says, "The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable." Neither explicitly mentions RC. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:18, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Bar box showing religious distribution
In this edit I moved the bar box, which is not limited to info on Abrahamic religions, out of the Abrahamic section into a new section headed Distribution. I have also replaced the unsupported content of the box with supported content, citing the supporting source.

I see that this edit to the Philippines article added another instance of this (or a similar) bar box there. I have made similar changes there. It strikes me, though, that it would probably be a good idea to centralize this bar box by wrapping it in a template (perhaps as Religious distribution in the Philippines) for ease of updating and to prevent divergence where it is presented in separate articles. I may do that if nobody else does it, unless someone gives a good reason why this would be a bad idea. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion concerning content in this article
A discussion is taking place here which concerns some content of this article. Interested editors are invited to join the discussion. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:00, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Remove the leading table?
I would suggest removing the leading table which has recently seen strange numbers inserted and which uses a different definition of Protestant from what the text uses. At least without that duplication it could be easier to settle on some accurately sourced numbers. (Throughout wikipedia, I see number vandalism in tables as a particular problem, so it would be good to reduce the number of unsourced and questionably sourced tables.)Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Bar box
I've moved the 2010 Religion in the Philippines bar box here from the Protestantism section of this version of the article for discussion and rework. The percentage figures shown add up to 138.35%. I think this likely came about by a combination of double counting and replacement of supported figures with unsupported figures.

I think that the double counting probably came from the inclusion of a "Mainline Protestants" bar which shows a percent aggregated from other bars which are also shown. The distinction "Mainline" is not drawn in the supporting source cited, and needs clarification and support -- my guess is that whomever made this distinction believes that category does not include Iglesia ni Cristo but does include some or other religious organizations which are Christian but not Catholic.

Also, the placement of this bar box into the Protestantism section seems odd, as it contains information outside of that subtopic.

Finally, when a consensus is reached on what the bar box should look like, what it should contain, and where it should be placed in the article, I would suggest wikitext similar to the following for the individual bars: using figures taken directly from the supporting source cited. It seems to me that doing this rather than precalculating the percentage figures would probably both discourage replacement of supported figures with unsupported and make such replacement easier to detect. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:58, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Reversions on 2014-10-28
I've reverted this string of a number of edits by User:Gatnamwaran. There may be some good edits in there but some of this, particularly insertion of "The church believes that God has buttocks because he has a throne in heaven." and what looks like a gratuitous mention of someone named Nicolas Perez, looks like it is probably unhelpful and possibly vandalous. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Religion in the Philippines
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Religion in the Philippines's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "newsroom": From The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the Philippines:  From Gordon B. Hinckley:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Religion in the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110715074453/http://philippine-directory.com/directory/.../Religion/Religion-3.htm to http://philippine-directory.com/directory/.../Religion/Religion-3.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:48, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Religion in the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/top-news/23829-inc-holds-19-simultaneous-grand-evangelical-missions-nationwide

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Religion in the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080820111240/http://sanghapinoy.bravehost.com/directory.htm to http://sanghapinoy.bravehost.com/directory.htm/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Picture
Why is the picture showing all of Zamboanga Peninsula as Muslim majority areas? When I checked the articles for Zamboanga del Norte, del Sur, Sibugay, and City, it says that Christianity is still the dominant religion even though these areas have a significant Muslim minority. I'm going to remove it for the time being because this seems like an attempt at political propaganda. I've already caught something similar when I saw "Bangsamoro" included in the dependent territories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ujimasa Hojo (talk • contribs) 14:46, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Protestant Demography
Does anyone know more info on the concentrations of Protestants in the Philippines? SO far from the data I research they are mostly concentrated in Northern Luzon and Mindanao especiall southern Mindanao

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Religion in the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150621051322/http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/opinion/view/20091011-229561/The-Indian-in-the-Filipino to http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/opinion/view/20091011-229561/The-Indian-in-the-Filipino
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090115190428/http://www.camperspoint.com/article.php3?id_article=239 to http://www.camperspoint.com/article.php3?id_article=239
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090115190428/http://www.camperspoint.com/article.php3?id_article=239 to http://www.camperspoint.com/article.php3?id_article=239
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120213230302/http://www.nhi.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158&Itemid=1 to http://www.nhi.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158&Itemid=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120703210211/http://cebueskrima.s5.com/custom3.html to http://cebueskrima.s5.com/custom3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Judaism
This edit caught my eye -- particularly the source citation. The cite has a date of May, 2008, but the article cited is dated 16 July 2019, and says at the bottom: "Issue May 2006". The very low figure of 100 Jewish in families given in the article assertion does agree with the cited source, but it seems very low based on my impression from having lived in the Philippines from 1996 to 2018. The figure seems to be for for families at one synagogue in Manila, though. I'm not Jewish, I did not live in Manila, and the Jews I met did not live in Manila either. I note that the History of the Jews in the Philippines article gives different numbers, some uncited and some citing this same source. I don't know a reliable source for this information, though. Sorry to be criticizing without being able to offer useful help. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 19:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC) I see that the supporting article cited is in the May 2006 issue of Jewish Times Asia, on pages 12-13. A copy of that issue is available on the website, but a (free) subscription is required in order to access it. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 20:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've added a reliable current source, and cleaned up some of the rest. The numbers are small. Jayjg (talk) 20:16, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I would expect Jewish religionists in the Philippines to be overwhelmingly foreigners. If I read it right, Philippine population by country of citizenship says that the 2010 census counted 177,368 non-citizens in the Philippines. List of religious populations puts Judaism at 0.2%, citing Adherents.com. I wouldn't think either of those numbers were especially accurate, but they suggest a ballpark. Running those numbers gives about 350, so I guess 500 is not out of the question. I can't put faces on more than half of these, but I think the self-identified Jews I happened to know in the Philippines outside of Manila numbered around 10; that's 2% of the figure of 500 for the entire Philippines. That's somewhere between WP:OR and pure guesswork, though. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:18, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Old Mosque Lanao Del Sur Philippines.jpg