User talk:Sebby16

Anecdotal information
I disagree with your use of anecdotes in the Christadelphians article, and I have added a comment on the talk page to this effect.

Personally I feel that comments like the following are unverifiable, easily challenged, and add nothing substantive to the article (and almost certainly would be contrary to Wiki guidelines).


 * Christadelphians have had many public discussions with other religions, most commonly Jehovah's Witnesses, and have not yet to date been proven wrong in their belief of the scriptures. Many Jehovah's Witnesses turned to the Christadelphian Faith after these discussions, believing the leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses to be misleading and ultimately wrong in their understanding of the scriptures. Catholics have also been unable to find a flaw in the Christadelphians, and one Priest was convinced by the Christadelphians that his religion was wrong, yet said that he could not change his 'faith' because he had a very comfortable lifestyle and was in a respected position in community.

Is there any evidence that Christadelphian discussions with other religions have been "most commonly with Jehovah's Witnesses"? They have "not yet to date been proven wrong" is a subjective opinion. "Many Jehovah's Witnesses turned to the Christadelphian Faith after these discussions". Can this be substantiated? What about the "many Christadelphians" who may have turned to other faiths? "Catholics have been unable to find a flaw in the Christadelphians". Is there an official Catholic source that can be cited? "One priest" is, well, "one priest". What about the thousands of priests who continue to be Catholics?

In my opinion this comment should be removed. Ekklesiastic 23:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)