Contents

Talk:Old School–New School controversy

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Old School–New School controversy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Reformed Christianity This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reformed Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Reformed Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Reformed ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject Reformed ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject Reformed ChristianityReformed Christianity articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. United States This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The Controversy is not defined, but has only the Civil War as adding to the debate. Was the primary cause of the Controversy Arminianism versus Calvinism? The reader will only learn something of the track and timeline of the debate, but not the specific reasons that caused the division as the article stands. Baptistark (talk) 19:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in the issues of the controversy. What did the Old School assert? What did the New School assert? It is as if an article on the civil war immediately started describing the battles without talking about the slavery or state rights. Tennysonm (talk) 05:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

good point. I added some theology. Rjensen (talk) 06:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't go on.

I was interested in what this controversy was. (I started studying Albert Barnes, so....) However, I remember when there was no PCUSA, (or PCA -- which is when the old denom factions enough that "USA" was added to the old denom's name), so to start that this controverse started with a denomination that wasn't around for another 100+ years, stopped me cold.

I know it's complicated, but that is supposed to be the reason for wiki -- to explain fully. And, yes, I know wiki has become extremely world-biased, but considering this is one of those topics the world doesn't care about, I would like to see it addressed well. (I'm hoping theologians seriously into history are working on this.)

I suspect the graphic is part of the problem, but since I don't know the history, I can't say for sure. 2600:4040:7EDC:6400:19BA:E70:E0BE:83BD (talk) 14:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:4040:7EDC:6400:19BA:E70:E0BE:83BD The PCUSA was definitely around then. The modern PC(USA) is the result of a bunch reunifications in the 20th century. If you read the PCUSA article it will explain the history. Ltwin (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]