http://orthodoxwiki.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Manchuria&feedformat=atomOrthodoxWiki - User contributions [en]2013-05-22T07:41:14ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.18.0http://orthodoxwiki.org/AtheismAtheism2011-02-18T07:23:18Z<p>Manchuria: /* External links */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Atheism''' is the belief that there is no [[God]]. It is not a mere lack of belief in God, nor is it a belief in ignorance of God, but specifically that there is no God. The belief that we cannot know or understand God or anything of a supra-material order (the previously mentioned belief in ignorance) is today generally termed "[[agnosticism]]." Both positions are condemned by the [[Orthodox Church]] for being a belief in error for denial (explicitly in the case of atheists and some agnostics, implicitly in the case of other agnostics) of the truth of God and [[Jesus Christ]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology== <br />
Although the word "atheism" is actually more appropriately applicable to "agnosticism." The "a-" prefix meaning "lack of," and "-theism" indicating belief in a higher power, an atheist is etymologically one without belief in a higher power, not someone who specifically denies the existence of such as the "atheists" of today do by definition. The more appropriate term for the denial of the supernatural would be "antitheism," "anti-" meaning "against," indicating opposition to belief in a higher power.<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[[wikipedia:Atheism|Atheism]] on Wikipedia.<br />
*[http://www.uq.edu.au/~laacassi/OrthodoxChristianityandMilitantAtheism.html Orthodox Christianity and Militant Atheism in the Twentieth Century] from [[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Timothy Ware]]'s ''The Orthodox Church'' (2nd ed), Penguin Books, London 1993, pp 145-9 and 162.<br />
*[http://www.3saints.com/atheism_orthodoxy.html Atheism and Orthodoxy in Modern Russia] delivered by Fr. [[Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Vienna|Hilarion Alfeyev]] at the [[Orthodox Peace Fellowship]] retreat in Vézelay, France, [[May 5|5]]-[[May 7|7 May]] 2001<br />
*[http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/the-challenge-of-atheism/ The Challenge of Atheism] by Fr. Stephen Freeman<br />
*[http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/christian-atheism/ Christian Atheism] by Fr. Stephen Freeman<br />
*[http://www.stmaryorthodoxchurch.org/orthodoxy/historyoforthodoxchurch.php History of the Orthodox Church: The Modern Church: Confrontation with Atheistic Regimes] by Aristeides Papadakis, Ph.D.<br />
*[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism] by Creation Ministries International<br />
[[Category:Heresies]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Αθεϊσμός]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/project2User:Manchuria/project22009-04-15T17:25:32Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>Sample format:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/project2User:Manchuria/project22009-04-15T17:04:01Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>Sample format:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] (external site)</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/project2User:Manchuria/project22009-04-15T17:03:12Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>Sample format:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - offsite article</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-04-04T20:56:08Z<p>Manchuria: /* External links */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
<br />
===Compatibilist===<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] The Word, June 1999, pp.31-34 An overview of Orthodox cosmology, intended for teachers and youth leaders as a background for discussion of various educational segments related to creation. Concise and useful for a general understanding of Orthodox cosmology.<br />
*Breck, Archpriest John V. [http://www.oca.org/CHRIST-life-article.asp?SID=6&ID=148&MONTH=February&YEAR=2008 "Ex Nihilo"] Life in Christ, February 2008 #1.<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article.<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"]<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"]<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"]<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"]<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge.<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"]<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"]<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273.<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). George Theokritoff is a paleontologist and Elizabeth is a theological scholar, author and editor of ''The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology'' (ISBN 0521683388).<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University.<br />
<br />
===Incompatibilist===<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution.<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"]<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation.<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://orthodoxnorth.net/evolution_new_fundamentalism_pt_1.htm "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from OrthodoxNorth.net<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. <br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
* Pontifical Gregorian University. [http://www.evolution-rome2009.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50&Itemid=54&lang=en International Conference on "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories": A critical appraisal 150 years after "The Origin of Species"]. Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome, 3-7 March 2009.<br />
* [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia <br />
* [http://www.creationwiki.org/Theory_of_evolution Theory of evolution] at CreationWiki.<br />
* [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english.html Creatio]. Shestodnev Orthodox Mission Center in Russia dedicated to defending Patristic creationism against evolution.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-04-04T20:55:47Z<p>Manchuria: /* External links */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
<br />
===Compatibilist===<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] The Word, June 1999, pp.31-34 An overview of Orthodox cosmology, intended for teachers and youth leaders as a background for discussion of various educational segments related to creation. Concise and useful for a general understanding of Orthodox cosmology.<br />
*Breck, Archpriest John V. [http://www.oca.org/CHRIST-life-article.asp?SID=6&ID=148&MONTH=February&YEAR=2008 "Ex Nihilo"] Life in Christ, February 2008 #1.<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article.<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"]<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"]<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"]<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"]<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge.<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"]<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"]<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273.<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). George Theokritoff is a paleontologist and Elizabeth is a theological scholar, author and editor of ''The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology'' (ISBN 0521683388).<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University.<br />
<br />
===Incompatibilist===<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution.<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"]<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation.<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://orthodoxnorth.net/evolution_new_fundamentalism_pt_1.htm "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from OrthodoxNorth.net<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. <br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
* Pontifical Gregorian University. [http://www.evolution-rome2009.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50&Itemid=54&lang=en International Conference on "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories": A critical appraisal 150 years after "The Origin of Species"]. Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome, 3-7 March 2009.<br />
* [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution] at Conservapedia <br />
* [http://www.creationwiki.org/Theory_of_evolution Theory of evolution] at CreationWiki.<br />
* [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english.html Creatio]. Shestodnev Orthodox Mission Center in Russia dedicated to defending Patristic creationism against evolution.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T15:36:26Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>TO Do list: <br />
<br />
1. Put information relating the origins and theology<br />
<br />
2. Compile more information on the invalidity of atheism<br />
<br />
3. Marketing plan for the above<br />
<br />
4. Publicity plan for the above</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T15:34:06Z<p>Manchuria: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T15:15:07Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_design Intelligent design] - Comprehensive article at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article at Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T15:14:51Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_design Intelligent design] - comprehensive article at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article at Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T15:07:31Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_design Intelligent design] - Conservapedia, comprehensive article<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Conservapedia, comprehensive article</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T15:06:02Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Conservapedia, comprehensive article<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_design Intelligent design] - Conservapedia, comprehensive article</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T14:50:09Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_design Intelligent design] - Comprehensive article</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-04-04T14:47:04Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Conservapedia<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_design Intelligent design] - Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-03-19T23:55:46Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/project2User:Manchuria/project22009-02-22T23:26:03Z<p>Manchuria: New page: Sample format: *[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article (offsite)</p>
<hr />
<div>Sample format:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - Comprehensive article (offsite)</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2009-02-22T23:25:02Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/project]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/project2]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-02-22T23:14:27Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] - An excellent article (offsite)</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-02-22T22:22:38Z<p>Manchuria: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-02-22T21:49:51Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>Links on creationism page:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Creationism Creationism] at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
also, ideally remove secular link section so more boosting power goes to conservapedia's links<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Link on evolution page:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-02-22T21:47:16Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>Links on creationism page:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Creationism Creationism] at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Link on evolution page:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-02-22T21:44:39Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>Links on creationism page:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Creationism Creationism] at Conservapedia<br />
<br />
Link on evolution page:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/projectUser:Manchuria/project2009-02-22T21:34:04Z<p>Manchuria: New page: *[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia</p>
<hr />
<div>*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] at Conservapedia</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2009-02-22T21:32:12Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/project]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2009-01-22T05:16:01Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/AtheismAtheism2009-01-22T05:14:40Z<p>Manchuria: /* External links */ replaced dead link with good link</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Atheism''' is the belief that there is no [[God]]. It is not a mere lack of belief in God, nor is it a belief in ignorance of God, but specifically that there is no God. The belief that we cannot know or understand God or anything of a supra-material order (the previously mentioned belief in ignorance) is today generally termed "[[agnosticism]]." Both positions are condemned by the [[Orthodox Church]] for being a belief in error for denial (explicitly in the case of atheists and some agnostics, implicitly in the case of other agnostics) of the truth of God and [[Jesus Christ]].<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.uq.edu.au/~laacassi/OrthodoxChristianityandMilitantAtheism.html Orthodox Christianity and Militant Atheism in the Twentieth Century] from [[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Timothy Ware]]'s ''The Orthodox Church'' (2nd ed), Penguin Books, London 1993, pp 145-9 and 162.<br />
*[http://www.3saints.com/atheism_orthodoxy.html Atheism and Orthodoxy in Modern Russia] delivered by Fr. [[Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Vienna|Hilarion Alfeyev]] at the [[Orthodox Peace Fellowship]] retreat in Vézelay, France, [[May 5|5]]-[[May 7|7 May]] 2001<br />
*[http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/the-challenge-of-atheism/ The Challenge of Atheism] by Fr. Stephen Freeman<br />
*[http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/christian-atheism/ Christian Atheism] by Fr. Stephen Freeman<br />
*[http://www.stmaryorthodoxchurch.org/orthodoxy/historyoforthodoxchurch.php History of the Orthodox Church: The Modern Church: Confrontation with Atheistic Regimes] by Aristeides Papadakis, Ph.D.<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism Atheism]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Heresies]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Αθεϊσμός]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T05:08:41Z<p>Manchuria: /* Articles */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://orthodoxnorth.net/evolution_new_fundamentalism_pt_1.htm "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from OrthodoxNorth.net<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:59:28Z<p>Manchuria: /* Articles */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution]<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://orthodoxnorth.net/evolution_new_fundamentalism_pt_1.htm "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from OrthodoxNorth.net<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:59:03Z<p>Manchuria: /* Articles */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution]<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://orthodoxnorth.net/evolution_new_fundamentalism_pt_1.htm "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from OrthodoxNorth<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:58:08Z<p>Manchuria: /* Articles */ replaced dead link with live link</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution]<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://orthodoxnorth.net/evolution_new_fundamentalism_pt_1.htm "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from Tserkovnost, an Eastern Orthodox Research Center. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:54:47Z<p>Manchuria: /* Articles */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution]<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://www.tserkovnost.org/articles/evolution-gascoigne.html "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from Tserkovnost, an Eastern Orthodox Research Center. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:54:18Z<p>Manchuria: /* External Links */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] <br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://www.tserkovnost.org/articles/evolution-gascoigne.html "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from Tserkovnost, an Eastern Orthodox Research Center. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:53:53Z<p>Manchuria: /* Articles */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Conservapedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] <br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://www.tserkovnost.org/articles/evolution-gascoigne.html "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from Tserkovnost, an Eastern Orthodox Research Center. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:52:57Z<p>Manchuria: /* External Links */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://www.tserkovnost.org/articles/evolution-gascoigne.html "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from Tserkovnost, an Eastern Orthodox Research Center. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32009-01-22T04:46:08Z<p>Manchuria: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/illustrative-examplesUser:Manchuria/illustrative-examples2009-01-22T04:45:32Z<p>Manchuria: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EvolutionEvolution2009-01-22T04:44:48Z<p>Manchuria: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Evolution''' is the popular name for a set of scientific theories which aim to explain the apparent similarity of different species and the appearance of complex species later in the fossil record. In short, evolution means that all life on earth shares a common ancestry which can traced back to a single species. Orthodox Christians have divergent views on how to react to this development in science.<br />
<br />
In general Orthodox responses can be grouped into two large categories, which we might label Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. <br />
<br />
Compatibilists hold that science and theology are compatible and view them as complementary revelations of God. As God is the source of both his specific revelation of himself in the Christian faith and the source of the general revelation of himself in nature, the findings of science and theology cannot really contradict; the contradictions must be merely apparent and a resolution possible which is faithful to the truth of God's revelation.<br />
<br />
Incompatibilists hold that science can be incompatible with faith. They usually argue either that science is philosophically based on a kind of naturalism or that God's specific revelation is infallible and therefore trumps the findings of human reason in the case of any conflict between them. This is often based on a suspicion of human reason to arrive at reliable conclusions in the first place.<br />
<br />
The development of modern science dates to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so no [[ecumenical council]] has ever addressed how to integrate it with divine revelation in a coherent and consistent worldview. As a result, there is not a dogmatic treatment examining how to resolve conflicts, whether apparent or real, when scientific findings appear to contradict divine revelation. Many early Fathers were happy to use the primitive science of their day to divine purposes, perhaps suggesting to modern Christians a compatibilist resolution to the question. Other Fathers, however, clearly see conflicts and contradictions which they resolve in favor of their understanding of Christian revelation. <br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr Seraphim]], ''Genesis, Creation, and Early Man'' &mdash; Contains a detailed examination of Patristic teaching related to the discussion of evolution and argues along the lines of modern creation science. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Woloschak, Gayle, ''Beauty and Unity in Creation: The evolution of life.'' (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1996) &mdash; Primer on the relationship between evolutionary biology and Orthodoxy by a scientist. ISBN 1880971275 '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==Articles==<br />
*Bensusan, Ephrem Hugh, [http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2005/06/orthodox-christianity-and-post.html "Orthodox Christianity and the Post-Christian Intelligentsia: A Response to Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo): Part 1"] Bensusan deals with the Archbishop's acceptance of evolution. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Boojamra, Dr. John, [http://www.annunciationakron.org/phyllisonest/pdf/creation.pdf "The Orthodox Idea of Creation"] A very basic explanation of the Orthodox notion of creation which touches on the subject, intended as part of an Orthodox education program for 8th or 9th grade. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Bufeev, S. V, [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html "Why an Orthodox Christian cannot be an evolutionist"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Christensen, Fr. Damascene, [http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/060222155510 "Interview with Fr. Damascene"] Monk Damascene speaks about the patristic view of creation. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Fritts, Kevin Basil, [http://blog.kevinbasil.com/on-the-dogma-of-creation/ "On the Dogma of Creation"] The author is a contributor to this OrthodoxWiki article. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Gascoigne, Fr. Serafim [http://www.tserkovnost.org/articles/evolution-gascoigne.html "Evolution" A New Fundamentalism"] from Tserkovnost, an Eastern Orthodox Research Center. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Hallam, Fr. Gregory, [http://antiochabouna.blogspot.com/2006/02/orthodoxy-and-creationism.html "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, [http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm "The Six Dawns"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.hvmla.org/library/evolution.html "Can an Orthodox Become an Evolutionist?"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Kuraev, Fr. Deacon Andrey, [http://www.sullivan-county.com/id4/ort_creation.htm "Orthodoxy and Creationism"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Maletis, John P., [http://www.theandros.com/protozoe.html "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century"]. <i>Theandros</i> Vol. 5 No. 3. '''Compatibilist''' <br />
*Metallinos, V. Rev. Prof. Dr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm "Faith and Science in Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology"] Very briefly mentions evolution, but overall states the traditional Orthodox position of separation between divine and earthly knowledge. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Mileant, [[Alexander (Mileant) of Buenos Aires|Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires]] and South America (ROCOR), [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/creation_man_a_mileant_e.htm "On the Appearance"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Nicozisin, Fr. George, [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/nicozisin_creationism.htm "Creationism versus Evolution"] '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.creatio.orthodoxy.ru/english/rose_genesis/index.html "Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision"] This page presents several chapters from Fr. Seraphim's book on creation from the patristic perspective. '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*[[Seraphim Rose|Rose, Fr. Seraphim]], [http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/evolution_frseraphim_kalomiros.aspx "Genesis and Early Man: The Orthodox patristic understanding"] '''Incompatibilist'''<br />
*Smith, Allyne, [[H. Tristram Engelhardt|H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.]], Edward Hughes, and J. Henry, "Orthodoxy", in ''The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition'' (2000): 268-273. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*Theokritoff, George, with Elizabeth Theokritoff, [http://jbburnett.com/resources/theokritoff_rose-svtq.pdf "Genesis and Creation: Towards a debate"] (PDF) &mdash; Review of Seraphim Rose, ''Genesis, Creation and Early Man: The Orthodox Christian Vision'', in ''St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly'', Volume 46, Number 2 (2002). '''Compatibilist'''<br />
*[[Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos|Vlachos, Hierotheos]], [http://www.parembasis.gr/0000/00_88_04.htm "Orthodox Theology and Science"] From the ''Greek Orthodox Theological Review''. Brookline: Spring 1999. Vol. 44, Iss. 1-4; pg. 131, 19 pgs. A useful introduction to the broader relationship between science and Orthodox Christianity.<br />
*[[Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia|Ware, Metropolitan Kallistos]], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H76rL6wN-F "Orthodoxy and Evolution"], video: answer to a question asked in a forum at Seattle Pacific University. '''Compatibilist'''<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Byzantine Creation Era]]<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's theory of evolution - a theory in crises]<br />
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution Evolution] by Conservapedia<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
<br />
[[el:Εξέλιξη]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32008-12-30T18:25:16Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom being more effective on the internet<br />
'''<br />
<br />
<br />
''Topics:''' <br />
<br />
1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the great commission via the internet<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Christendom raising more charitable contributions via [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf e-philanthropy] (President elect Obama raised a lot of money via the internet and unfortunately McCain did not) <br />
<br />
<br />
3. Christendom raising money via e-commerce (the Apostle Paul certainly did support himself at times though tentmaking).<br />
<br />
<br />
Below is a amount of web traffic according to Alexa for some well known Christian apologetics ministries, creation science apologetic ministries, and some conservative Christian colleges and seminaries. In addition, there is data regarding how efficiently these organizations websites are pulling in web traffic via the search engines relative to their web traffic according to Alexa. Search engine traffic like Google can drive a tremendous amount of targeted web traffic to a website.<br />
<br />
Next, I put some recommendations below on how these various institutions could get significantly more web traffic plus more effectively carry out the great commission. <br />
<br />
Next, President elect Obama raised a lot of money on the internet via e-philanthropy. I see no reason why Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic institutions could not do the same. I offer a very quick overview of e-philanthropy<br />
<br />
Lastly, as noted earlier Paul supported himself by making tents. There is no reason that Christians who take internet evangelism courses cannot use some of their skills for e-commerce and be partially or even fully funded in some cases via this method. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
Google SE Traffic is the number of visitors coming from site results in Google Organic (unpaid search results)<br />
<br />
<br />
*Alexa web traffic results below are for the Christmas week in 2008<br />
<br />
<br />
*The data below was gained from the excellent free software tool called [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox]<br />
<br />
==Creation Science apologetics Ministries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Answers In Genesis:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .004% <br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 70.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Institute for Creation Research:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00068%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.1k <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Creation Ministries International:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0004%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 0.6k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==General Christian apologetics websites==<br />
<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''ChristianAnswers.net:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0052%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 338.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''CARM.com'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0019%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 122.9k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tektonics.org''' <br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00054%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 6.5k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''LeadershipU:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0012%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 78.7k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==Christian Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Southern Baptist Theological Seminary'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00025%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.2k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Liberty University'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0033%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 3.2k<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Regents University:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .000106%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 32.1k visitors a month<br />
<br />
==Recommendations==<br />
<br />
I think there are currently three big ways that Christian apologetics websites and Christian academic institutions could gain significantly more web traffic and also better carry out the great commission.<br />
<br />
1. Christian websites and Christian definitely need to upgrade their skills on how to get more internet traffic through ranking high on the search engines for popular searches and through other methods as well. While some quality e-books could be created on this subject and this could definitely produce significant results, I do think it would be helpful if Christian colleges and universities need to start offering internet evangelism courses. The data above suggests that ministries which more effectively utilize the search engines get more web traffic relative to their total web traffic. In other words, a lot more water could be squeezed out of the internet sponge. I do realize that often targeted search engine web traffic pulls in fewer people but there are more conversions. For example, a Christian website could be search engine search engine optimized for "Britney Spears" and have a top Google ranking for this search, however, the type of people attracted might not be interested in becoming a Christian or enrolling in a conservative Christian college. On the other hand, getting a top Google ranking for "conquering alcoholism", "Christian colleges", or Seminaries would be far more effective.<br />
<br />
2. When a webpage is trying to rank high at Google for a search term often it is very invaluable if authoritative webpages link to each other. .Edu webpages and webpages that are ranked high for a particular search are authoritative websites. This suggest that Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic websites need to start linking to each other with relevant articles. Christian colleges could start creating top search engine ranked articles for evangelism and apologetics via students who were enrolled in internet evangelism courses. In addition, I do think that general Christian apologetic websites and Christian colleges and universities need to start doing more reciprocal linking with Creation Science websites for key articles and not merely a link page to main pages of creation science websites. I say this because Darwinism appears to be greatly hindering evangelism in the Western World. <br />
<br />
3. Christian apologetic websites need to start contacting Christian colleges about offering internet evangelism courses. Reciprocal linking, free intern labor, and other opportunities are just too good to not capitalize on. The colleges would make money offering these courses so it would be a win-win situation.<br />
<br />
===Christian colleges offering e-philanthropy courses===<br />
<br />
There certainly are Christian organizations raising a lot of money via charitable contributions as can be seen [http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=222 HERE] <br />
<br />
The amount of internet contributions to President elect Obama suggests that more could be raised by Christendom if they better utilized e-philanthropy. There is a great overview of e-philanthropy [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf HERE]<br />
<br />
===Where I would like to fit in===<br />
I would like to help spearhead internet evangelism courses and e-philanthropy courses being offered at Christian colleges and universities plus get the Christian colleges and Christian apologetic websites to work together more. I do know more than most of the Christian apologetic websites about this area. I strongly believe that Christendom needs to develop the three areas of: internet evangelism, e-philanthropy, and e-commerce courses.</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32008-12-30T18:22:41Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom being more effective on the internet<br />
'''<br />
<br />
<br />
''Topics:''' <br />
<br />
1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the great commission via the internet<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Christendom raising more charitable contributions via [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf e-philanthropy] (President elect Obama raised a lot of money via the internet and unfortunately McCain did not) <br />
<br />
<br />
3. Christendom raising money via e-commerce (the Apostle Paul certainly did support himself at times though tentmaking).<br />
<br />
<br />
Below is a amount of web traffic according to Alexa for some well known Christian apologetics ministries, creation science apologetic ministries, and some conservative Christian colleges and seminaries. In addition, there is data regarding how efficiently these organizations websites are pulling in web traffic via the search engines relative to their web traffic according to Alexa. Search engine traffic like Google can drive a tremendous amount of targeted web traffic to a website.<br />
<br />
Next, I put some recommendations below on how these various institutions could get significantly more web traffic plus more effectively carry out the great commission. <br />
<br />
Next, President elect Obama raised a lot of money on the internet via e-philanthropy. I see no reason why Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic institutions could not do the same. I offer a very quick overview of e-philanthropy<br />
<br />
Lastly, Paul raised money by making tents. There is no reason that Christians who take internet evangelism courses cannot use some of their skills for e-commerce and be partially or even fully funded in some cases via this method. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
Google SE Traffic is the number of visitors coming from site results in Google Organic (unpaid search results)<br />
<br />
<br />
*Alexa web traffic results below are for the Christmas week in 2008<br />
<br />
<br />
*The data below was gained from the excellent free software tool called [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox]<br />
<br />
==Creation Science apologetics Ministries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Answers In Genesis:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .004% <br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 70.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Institute for Creation Research:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00068%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.1k <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Creation Ministries International:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0004%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 0.6k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==General Christian apologetics websites==<br />
<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''ChristianAnswers.net:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0052%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 338.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''CARM.com'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0019%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 122.9k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tektonics.org''' <br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00054%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 6.5k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''LeadershipU:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0012%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 78.7k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==Christian Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Southern Baptist Theological Seminary'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00025%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.2k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Liberty University'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0033%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 3.2k<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Regents University:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .000106%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 32.1k visitors a month<br />
<br />
==Recommendations==<br />
<br />
I think there are currently three big ways that Christian apologetics websites and Christian academic institutions could gain significantly more web traffic and also better carry out the great commission.<br />
<br />
1. Christian websites and Christian definitely need to upgrade their skills on how to get more internet traffic through ranking high on the search engines for popular searches and through other methods as well. While some quality e-books could be created on this subject and this could definitely produce significant results, I do think it would be helpful if Christian colleges and universities need to start offering internet evangelism courses. The data above suggests that ministries which more effectively utilize the search engines get more web traffic relative to their total web traffic. In other words, a lot more water could be squeezed out of the internet sponge. I do realize that often targeted search engine web traffic pulls in fewer people but there are more conversions. For example, a Christian website could be search engine search engine optimized for "Britney Spears" and have a top Google ranking for this search, however, the type of people attracted might not be interested in becoming a Christian or enrolling in a conservative Christian college. On the other hand, getting a top Google ranking for "conquering alcoholism", "Christian colleges", or Seminaries would be far more effective.<br />
<br />
2. When a webpage is trying to rank high at Google for a search term often it is very invaluable if authoritative webpages link to each other. .Edu webpages and webpages that are ranked high for a particular search are authoritative websites. This suggest that Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic websites need to start linking to each other with relevant articles. Christian colleges could start creating top search engine ranked articles for evangelism and apologetics via students who were enrolled in internet evangelism courses. In addition, I do think that general Christian apologetic websites and Christian colleges and universities need to start doing more reciprocal linking with Creation Science websites for key articles and not merely a link page to main pages of creation science websites. I say this because Darwinism appears to be greatly hindering evangelism in the Western World. <br />
<br />
3. Christian apologetic websites need to start contacting Christian colleges about offering internet evangelism courses. Reciprocal linking, free intern labor, and other opportunities are just too good to not capitalize on. The colleges would make money offering these courses so it would be a win-win situation.<br />
<br />
===Christian colleges offering e-philanthropy courses===<br />
<br />
There certainly are Christian organizations raising a lot of money via charitable contributions as can be seen [http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=222 HERE] <br />
<br />
The amount of internet contributions to President elect Obama suggests that more could be raised by Christendom if they better utilized e-philanthropy. There is a great overview of e-philanthropy [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf HERE]<br />
<br />
===Where I would like to fit in===<br />
I would like to help spearhead internet evangelism courses and e-philanthropy courses being offered at Christian colleges and universities plus get the Christian colleges and Christian apologetic websites to work together more. I do know more than most of the Christian apologetic websites about this area. I strongly believe that Christendom needs to develop the three areas of: internet evangelism, e-philanthropy, and e-commerce courses.</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32008-12-30T18:21:35Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom being more effective on the internet<br />
'''<br />
<br />
<br />
''Topics:''' <br />
<br />
1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the great commission via the internet<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Christendom raising more charitable contributions via [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf e-philanthropy] (President elect Obama raised a lot of money via the internet and unfortunately McCain did not) <br />
<br />
<br />
3. Christendom raising money via e-commerce<br />
<br />
<br />
Below is a amount of web traffic according to Alexa for some well known Christian apologetics ministries, creation science apologetic ministries, and some conservative Christian colleges and seminaries. In addition, there is data regarding how efficiently these organizations websites are pulling in web traffic via the search engines relative to their web traffic according to Alexa. Search engine traffic like Google can drive a tremendous amount of targeted web traffic to a website.<br />
<br />
Next, I put some recommendations below on how these various institutions could get significantly more web traffic plus more effectively carry out the great commission. <br />
<br />
Next, President elect Obama raised a lot of money on the internet via e-philanthropy. I see no reason why Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic institutions could not do the same. I offer a very quick overview of e-philanthropy<br />
<br />
Lastly, Paul raised money by making tents. There is no reason that Christians who take internet evangelism courses cannot use some of their skills for e-commerce and be partially or even fully funded in some cases via this method. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
Google SE Traffic is the number of visitors coming from site results in Google Organic (unpaid search results)<br />
<br />
<br />
*Alexa web traffic results below are for the Christmas week in 2008<br />
<br />
<br />
*The data below was gained from the excellent free software tool called [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox]<br />
<br />
==Creation Science apologetics Ministries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Answers In Genesis:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .004% <br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 70.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Institute for Creation Research:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00068%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.1k <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Creation Ministries International:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0004%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 0.6k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==General Christian apologetics websites==<br />
<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''ChristianAnswers.net:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0052%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 338.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''CARM.com'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0019%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 122.9k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tektonics.org''' <br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00054%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 6.5k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''LeadershipU:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0012%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 78.7k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==Christian Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Southern Baptist Theological Seminary'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00025%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.2k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Liberty University'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0033%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 3.2k<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Regents University:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .000106%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 32.1k visitors a month<br />
<br />
==Recommendations==<br />
<br />
I think there are currently three big ways that Christian apologetics websites and Christian academic institutions could gain significantly more web traffic and also better carry out the great commission.<br />
<br />
1. Christian websites and Christian definitely need to upgrade their skills on how to get more internet traffic through ranking high on the search engines for popular searches and through other methods as well. While some quality e-books could be created on this subject and this could definitely produce significant results, I do think it would be helpful if Christian colleges and universities need to start offering internet evangelism courses. The data above suggests that ministries which more effectively utilize the search engines get more web traffic relative to their total web traffic. In other words, a lot more water could be squeezed out of the internet sponge. I do realize that often targeted search engine web traffic pulls in fewer people but there are more conversions. For example, a Christian website could be search engine search engine optimized for "Britney Spears" and have a top Google ranking for this search, however, the type of people attracted might not be interested in becoming a Christian or enrolling in a conservative Christian college. On the other hand, getting a top Google ranking for "conquering alcoholism", "Christian colleges", or Seminaries would be far more effective.<br />
<br />
2. When a webpage is trying to rank high at Google for a search term often it is very invaluable if authoritative webpages link to each other. .Edu webpages and webpages that are ranked high for a particular search are authoritative websites. This suggest that Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic websites need to start linking to each other with relevant articles. Christian colleges could start creating top search engine ranked articles for evangelism and apologetics via students who were enrolled in internet evangelism courses. In addition, I do think that general Christian apologetic websites and Christian colleges and universities need to start doing more reciprocal linking with Creation Science websites for key articles and not merely a link page to main pages of creation science websites. I say this because Darwinism appears to be greatly hindering evangelism in the Western World. <br />
<br />
3. Christian apologetic websites need to start contacting Christian colleges about offering internet evangelism courses. Reciprocal linking, free intern labor, and other opportunities are just too good to not capitalize on. The colleges would make money offering these courses so it would be a win-win situation.<br />
<br />
===Christian colleges offering e-philanthropy courses===<br />
<br />
There certainly are Christian organizations raising a lot of money via charitable contributions as can be seen [http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=222 HERE] <br />
<br />
The amount of internet contributions to President elect Obama suggests that more could be raised by Christendom if they better utilized e-philanthropy. There is a great overview of e-philanthropy [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf HERE]<br />
<br />
===Where I would like to fit in===<br />
I would like to help spearhead internet evangelism courses and e-philanthropy courses being offered at Christian colleges and universities plus get the Christian colleges and Christian apologetic websites to work together more. I do know more than most of the Christian apologetic websites about this area. I strongly believe that Christendom needs to develop the three areas of: internet evangelism, e-philanthropy, and e-commerce courses.</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32008-12-30T18:17:46Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom being more effective on the internet<br />
'''<br />
<br />
<br />
''Topics:''' <br />
<br />
1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the great commission via the internet<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Christendom raising more charitable contributions via [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf e-philanthropy] (President elect Obama raised a lot of money via the internet and unfortunately McCain did not) <br />
<br />
<br />
3. Christendom raising money via e-commerce<br />
<br />
<br />
Below is a amount of web traffic according to Alexa for some well known Christian apologetics ministries, creation science apologetic ministries, and some conservative Christian colleges and seminaries. In addition, there is data regarding how efficiently these organizations websites are pulling in web traffic via the search engines relative to their web traffic according to Alexa. Search engine traffic like Google can drive a tremendous amount of targeted web traffic to a website.<br />
<br />
Next, I put some recommendations below on how these various institutions could get significantly more web traffic plus more effectively carry out the great commission. <br />
<br />
Next, President elect Obama raised a lot of money on the internet via e-philanthropy. I see no reason why Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic institutions could not do the same. I offer a very quick overview of e-philanthropy<br />
<br />
Lastly, Paul raised money by making tents. There is no reason that Christians who take internet evangelism courses cannot use some of their skills for e-commerce and be partially or even fully funded in some cases via this method. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
Google SE Traffic is the number of visitors coming from site results in Google Organic (unpaid search results)<br />
<br />
<br />
*Alexa web traffic results below are for the Christmas week in 2008<br />
<br />
<br />
*The data below was gained from the excellent free software tool called [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox]<br />
<br />
==Creation Science apologetics Ministries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Answers In Genesis:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .004% <br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 70.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Institute for Creation Research:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00068%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.1k <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Creation Ministries International:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0004%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 0.6k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==General Christian apologetics websites==<br />
<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''ChristianAnswers.net:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0052%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 338.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''CARM.com'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0019%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 122.9k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tektonics.org''' <br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00054%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 6.5k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''LeadershipU:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0012%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 78.7k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==Christian Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Southern Baptist Theological Seminary'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00025%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.2k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Liberty University'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0033%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 3.2k<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Regents University:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .000106%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 32.1k visitors a month<br />
<br />
==Recommendations==<br />
<br />
I think there are currently three big ways that Christian apologetics websites and Christian academic institutions could gain significantly more web traffic and also better carry out the great commission.<br />
<br />
1. Christian colleges and universities need to start offering internet evangelism courses. The data above suggests that ministries which more effectively utilize the search engines get more web traffic relative to their total web traffic. In other words, a lot more water could be squeezed out of the internet sponge. I do realize that often targeted search engine web traffic pulls in fewer people but there are more conversions. For example, a Christian website could be search engine search engine optimized for "Britney Spears" and have a top Google ranking for this search, however, the type of people attracted might not be interested in becoming a Christian or enrolling in a conservative Christian college. On the other hand, getting a top Google ranking for "conquering alcoholism", "Christian colleges", or Seminaries would be far more effective.<br />
<br />
2. When a webpage is trying to rank high at Google for a search term often it is very invaluable if authoritative webpages link to each other. .Edu webpages and webpages that are ranked high for a particular search are authoritative websites. This suggest that Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic websites need to start linking to each other with relevant articles. Christian colleges could start creating top search engine ranked articles for evangelism and apologetics via students who were enrolled in internet evangelism courses. In addition, I do think that general Christian apologetic websites and Christian colleges and universities need to start doing more reciprocal linking with Creation Science websites for key articles and not merely a link page to main pages of creation science websites. I say this because Darwinism appears to be greatly hindering evangelism in the Western World. <br />
<br />
3. Christian apologetic websites need to start contacting Christian colleges about offering internet evangelism courses. Reciprocal linking, free intern labor, and other opportunities are just too good to not capitalize on. The colleges would make money offering these courses so it would be a win-win situation.<br />
<br />
===Christian colleges offering e-philanthropy courses===<br />
<br />
There certainly are Christian organizations raising a lot of money via charitable contributions as can be seen [http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=222 HERE] <br />
<br />
The amount of internet contributions to President elect Obama suggests that more could be raised by Christendom if they better utilized e-philanthropy. There is a great overview of e-philanthropy [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf HERE]<br />
<br />
===Where I would like to fit in===<br />
I would like to help spearhead internet evangelism courses and e-philanthropy courses being offered at Christian colleges and universities plus get the Christian colleges and Christian apologetic websites to work together more. I do know more than most of the Christian apologetic websites about this area. I strongly believe that Christendom needs to develop the three areas of: internet evangelism, e-philanthropy, and e-commerce courses.</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32008-12-30T18:15:49Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom being more effective on the internet<br />
'''<br />
<br />
<br />
''Topics:''' <br />
<br />
1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the great commission via the internet<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Christendom raising more charitable contributions via [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf e-philanthropy] (President elect Obama raised a lot of money via the internet and unfortunately McCain did not) <br />
<br />
<br />
3. Christendom raising money via e-commerce<br />
<br />
<br />
Below is a amount of web traffic according to Alexa for some well known Christian apologetics ministries, creation science apologetic ministries, and some conservative Christian colleges and seminaries. In addition, there is data regarding how efficiently these organizations websites are pulling in web traffic via the search engines relative to their web traffic according to Alexa. Search engine traffic like Google can drive a tremendous amount of targeted web traffic to a website.<br />
<br />
Next, I put some recommendations below on how these various institutions could get significantly more web traffic plus more effectively carry out the great commission. <br />
<br />
Next, President elect Obama raised a lot of money on the internet via e-philanthropy. I see no reason why Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic institutions could not do the same. I offer a very quick overview of e-philanthropy<br />
<br />
Lastly, Paul raised money by making tents. There is no reason that Christians who take internet evangelism courses cannot use some of their skills for e-commerce and be partially or even fully funded in some cases via this method. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
Google SE Traffic is the number of visitors coming from site results in Google Organic (unpaid search results)<br />
<br />
<br />
*Alexa web traffic results below are for the Christmas week in 2008<br />
<br />
<br />
*The data below was gained from the excellent free software tool called [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox]<br />
<br />
==Creation Science apologetics Ministries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Answers In Genesis:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .004% <br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 70.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Institute for Creation Research:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00068%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.1k <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Creation Ministries International:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0004%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 0.6k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==General Christian apologetics websites==<br />
<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''ChristianAnswers.net:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0052%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 338.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''CARM.com'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0019%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 122.9k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tektonics.org''' <br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00054%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 6.5k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''LeadershipU:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0012%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 78.7k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==Christian Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Southern Baptist Theological Seminary'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00025%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.2k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Liberty University'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0033%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 3.2k<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Regents University:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .000106%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 32.1k visitors a month<br />
<br />
==Recommendations==<br />
<br />
I think there are currently three big ways that Christian apologetics websites and Christian academic institutions could gain significantly more web traffic and also better carry out the great commission.<br />
<br />
1. Christian colleges and universities need to start offering internet evangelism courses. The data above suggests that ministries which more effectively utilize the search engines get more web traffic relative to their total web traffic. In other words, a lot more water could be squeezed out of the internet sponge. I do realize that often targeted search engine web traffic pulls in fewer people but there are more conversions. For example, a Christian website could be search engine search engine optimized for "Britney Spears" and have a top Google ranking for this search, however, the type of people attracted might not be interested in becoming a Christian or enrolling in a conservative Christian college. On the other hand, getting a top Google ranking for "conquering alcoholism", "Christian colleges", or Seminaries would be far more effective.<br />
<br />
2. When a webpage is trying to rank high at Google for a search term often it is very invaluable if authoritative webpages link to each other. .Edu webpages and webpages that are ranked high for a particular search are authoritative websites. This suggest that Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic websites need to start linking to each other with relevant articles. Christian colleges could start creating top search engine ranked articles for evangelism and apologetics via students who were enrolled in internet evangelism courses. In addition, I do think that general Christian apologetic websites and Christian colleges and universities need to start doing more reciprocal linking with Creation Science websites for key articles and not merely a link page to main pages of creation science websites. I say this because Darwinism appears to be greatly hindering evangelism in the Western World. <br />
<br />
3. Christian apologetic websites need to start contacting Christian colleges about offering internet evangelism courses. Reciprocal linking, free intern labor, and other opportunities are just too good to not capitalize on. The colleges would make money offering these courses so it would be a win-win situation.<br />
<br />
===Christian colleges offering e-philanthropy courses===<br />
<br />
There certainly are Christian organizations raising a lot of money via charitable contributions as can be seen [http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=222 HERE] <br />
<br />
The amount of internet contributions to President elect Obama suggests that more could be raised by Christendom if they better utilized e-philanthropy. There is a great overview of e-philanthropy [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf HERE]<br />
<br />
===Where I would like to fit in===<br />
I would like to help spearhead internet evangelism courses and e-philanthropy courses being offered at Christian colleges and universities. I do know more than most of the Christian apologetic websites about this area. In addition, I believe I have some opportunities to get involved in e-commerce. I strongly believe that Christendom needs to develop the three areas of: internet evangelism, e-philanthropy, and e-commerce courses. Again, if you want to contact me you can contact Ken at: kendemyerATgmail.com</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspace3User:Manchuria/workspace32008-12-30T18:15:19Z<p>Manchuria: New page: '''Christendom being more effective on the internet ''' ''Topics:''' 1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the ...</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom being more effective on the internet<br />
'''<br />
<br />
<br />
''Topics:''' <br />
<br />
1. Christendom Being More Effective on the Internet in terms of getting more web traffic and also carrying out the great commission via the internet<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Christendom raising more charitable contributions via [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf e-philanthropy] (President elect Obama raised a lot of money via the internet and unfortunately McCain did not) <br />
<br />
<br />
3. Christendom raising money via e-commerce<br />
<br />
<br />
Below is a amount of web traffic according to Alexa for some well known Christian apologetics ministries, creation science apologetic ministries, and some conservative Christian colleges and seminaries. In addition, there is data regarding how efficiently these organizations websites are pulling in web traffic via the search engines relative to their web traffic according to Alexa. Search engine traffic like Google can drive a tremendous amount of targeted web traffic to a website.<br />
<br />
Next, I put some recommendations below on how these various institutions could get significantly more web traffic plus more effectively carry out the great commission. <br />
<br />
Next, President elect Obama raised a lot of money on the internet via e-philanthropy. I see no reason why Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic institutions could not do the same. I offer a very quick overview of e-philanthropy<br />
<br />
Lastly, Paul raised money by making tents. There is no reason that Christians who take internet evangelism courses cannot use some of their skills for e-commerce and be partially or even fully funded in some cases via this method. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
Google SE Traffic is the number of visitors coming from site results in Google Organic (unpaid search results)<br />
<br />
<br />
*Alexa web traffic results below are for the Christmas week in 2008<br />
<br />
<br />
*The data below was gained from the excellent free software tool called [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox]<br />
<br />
==Creation Science apologetics Ministries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Answers In Genesis:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .004% <br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 70.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Institute for Creation Research:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00068%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.1k <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Creation Ministries International:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0004%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 0.6k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==General Christian apologetics websites==<br />
<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''ChristianAnswers.net:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0052%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 338.3k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''CARM.com'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0019%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 122.9k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Tektonics.org''' <br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00054%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 6.5k visitors per month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''LeadershipU:'''<br />
<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0012%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 78.7k visitors per month<br />
<br />
==Christian Colleges, Universities, and Seminaries==<br />
<br />
The numbers below are merely estimates using software that estimates web traffic and the web traffic could be significantly higher. I would need to logs of these websites to give truly accurate information.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Southern Baptist Theological Seminary'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .00025%<br />
<br />
*Google SE traffic: 9.2k visitors a month<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Liberty University'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .0033%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 3.2k<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Regents University:'''<br />
<br />
*Percent of global Internet users who visit this site according to Alexa: .000106%<br />
<br />
*Google SE Traffic: 32.1k visitors a month<br />
<br />
==Recommendations==<br />
<br />
I think there are currently three big ways that Christian apologetics websites and Christian academic institutions could gain significantly more web traffic and also better carry out the great commission.<br />
<br />
1. Christian colleges and universities need to start offering internet evangelism courses. The data above suggests that ministries which more effectively utilize the search engines get more web traffic relative to their total web traffic. In other words, a lot more water could be squeezed out of the internet sponge. I do realize that often targeted search engine web traffic pulls in fewer people but there are more conversions. For example, a Christian website could be search engine search engine optimized for "Britney Spears" and have a top Google ranking for this search, however, the type of people attracted might not be interested in becoming a Christian or enrolling in a conservative Christian college. On the other hand, getting a top Google ranking for "conquering alcoholism", "Christian colleges", or Seminaries would be far more effective.<br />
<br />
2. When a webpage is trying to rank high at Google for a search term often it is very invaluable if authoritative webpages link to each other. .Edu webpages and webpages that are ranked high for a particular search are authoritative websites. This suggest that Christian apologetic websites and Christian academic websites need to start linking to each other with relevant articles. Christian colleges could start creating top search engine ranked articles for evangelism and apologetics via students who were enrolled in internet evangelism courses. In addition, I do think that general Christian apologetic websites and Christian colleges and universities need to start doing more reciprocal linking with Creation Science websites for key articles and not merely a link page to main pages of creation science websites. I say this because Darwinism appears to be greatly hindering evangelism in the Western World. <br />
<br />
3. Christian apologetic websites need to start contacting Christian colleges about offering internet evangelism courses. Reciprocal linking, free intern labor, and other opportunities are just too good to not capitalize on. The colleges would make money offering these courses so it would be a win-win situation.<br />
<br />
===Christian colleges offering e-philanthropy courses===<br />
<br />
There certainly are Christian organizations raising a lot of money via charitable contributions as can be seen [http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=222 HERE] <br />
<br />
The amount of internet contributions to President elect Obama suggests that more could be raised by Christendom if they better utilized e-philanthropy. There is a great overview of e-philanthropy [http://www.fundraising123.org/files/NP911021908.pdf HERE]<br />
<br />
I know some excellent books on e-philanthropy and please email Ken at: kendemyerATgmail.com if you want to know more.<br />
<br />
===Where I would like to fit in===<br />
I would like to help spearhead internet evangelism courses and e-philanthropy courses being offered at Christian colleges and universities. I do know more than most of the Christian apologetic websites about this area. In addition, I believe I have some opportunities to get involved in e-commerce. I strongly believe that Christendom needs to develop the three areas of: internet evangelism, e-philanthropy, and e-commerce courses. Again, if you want to contact me you can contact Ken at: kendemyerATgmail.com</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2008-12-30T18:14:32Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/illustrative-examples]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace3]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2008-10-17T05:36:11Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/illustrative-examples]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace3]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/illustrative-examplesUser:Manchuria/illustrative-examples2008-10-15T01:10:11Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>I enjoyed talking to you on the phone. <br />
<br />
I know you want to spread Christianity on the internet and did not understand what I was trying to convey. I know the concept of anchor text can be hard to explain verbally. It is a easy concept though.<br />
<br />
<br />
Anchor text (also called link label) is the visible, clickable text in a hyperlink.<br />
<br />
<br />
Here is an article on anchor text and used wisely and cautiously anchor text can help your search engine rankings for a webpage: http://www.associateprograms.com/articles/17/1/Anchor-text-explained<br />
There are computer programs which can analyze the anchor text of competing webpages and you can use this analysis to determine your anchor text usage. <br />
<br />
<br />
Here are three examples of anchor text:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. Example of anchor text being the word evolution on a webpage:<br />
<br />
[http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolutio Evolution] - Excellent Comprehensive Article On Evolution<br />
<br />
Non anchor text examples for the search evolution:<br />
<br />
[http://creationontheweb.com/ Creation Ministries International]<br />
<br />
[http://www.rae.org/ Revolution Against Evolution] <br />
<br />
[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Darwin's Theory of Evolution]<br />
<br />
[http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/ Creation Science]<br />
<br />
[http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rossuk/c-links.htm Anti Evolution Articles]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Example of anchor text being the word atheism on a webpage:<br />
<br />
<br />
[http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheis Atheism] at WebsiteX<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
3. Example of anchor text being the words Intelligent design on a webpage:<br />
<br />
<br />
[http://www.conservapedia.com/Intelligent_desig Intelligent design] at Website X</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:ManchuriaUser:Manchuria2008-10-15T01:06:38Z<p>Manchuria: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2008-10-15T00:58:52Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/illustrative-examples]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace2]]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ManchuriaUser talk:Manchuria2008-10-15T00:58:30Z<p>Manchuria: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}} &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 15:09, July 7, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/illustrative-examples]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Manchuria/workspace2]</div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspaceUser:Manchuria/workspace2008-10-15T00:57:16Z<p>Manchuria: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Manchuriahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Manchuria/workspaceUser:Manchuria/workspace2008-10-15T00:54:15Z<p>Manchuria: Undo revision 76544 by Manchuria (Talk)</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Christendom using the internet more effectively to reach more people with the message of Christianity <br />
'''<br />
==Purpose of this resource==<br />
The following material is being created to provide Christendom with resources on how to spread Christianity more effectively and powerfully on the internet. <br />
<br />
==Average Non-Technical People Creating Websites to Spread Christianity==<br />
I created this resource to help Christian website owners gain more internet traffic so they could more effectively reach greater number of people in regards to refuting false worldviews and so they could reach more people with information on why Christianity is true. However, I quickly came to realize via some non-technical Christian friends of mine that there were people who don't know how to create websites that were interested in using the internet to spread Christianity and other information, but felt that creating a website would be too difficult for them to learn within a reasonable amount of time or too difficult for them to learn period. <br />
<br />
However, with that being said there is a company that offers a package designed for the non-technical person which has enabled people to create excellent websites. I think this is important for Christendom to know about because if there are more Christian websites and they link to each other Christendom will be stronger on the internet. Several colleges are using the package that they offer. If you want to market their package, the companies affiliate marketing package is located [http://affiliates.sitesell.com/victory4.html HERE.] If you do not want to market their package and merely wish to buy it you can purchase it [http://proof.sitesell.com/victory4.html HERE.] <br />
<br />
If you already have a website and know how to create successful websites as far as how to build them using various software tools (Dreamwweaver, HTML, etc. ) then the above resource will not provide you as much value or may not be for you. However, for the newbie I think it is a good package.<br />
<br />
==Creating articles that will bring the most traffic to a website==<br />
Please note: Please only let people who believe in biblical Christianity know about this resource. I don't want this resource to be used to help spread false ideologies and religions. <br />
<br />
There is a saying among the people in the business of getting web traffic to a website that content is king. This is certainly true and more will be discussed about creating quality content shortly.<br />
<br />
If you have a VERY weak website in terms of ranking high at the the search engines for various searches (commonly called search engine optimization (SEO) then your best tactic to use is the tactic of getting more websites to link to you which will be explained later. If you have a weak website in terms of web traffic, your best strategy in in regards to building web traffic in most cases is to use a long-tail keyword strategy. The reason why the long-tail keyword strategy is best for a weaker website is that a weaker website has a harder time competing for popular searches. Since a large amount of web web traffic for a search goes to the top 5 to top 7 ranking websites for a search it is therefore better to be a big fish in small less popular search then be a sardine (low ranking site) for a popular search. Only 3% of people ever look beyond the first 30 results of a search engine query.<br />
<br />
Here are some articles on the long-tail keyword strategy :<br />
<br />
http://www.searchengineguide.com/matt-bailey/keyword-strategies-the-long-tail.php<br />
<br />
http://www.doshdosh.com/how-to-target-long-tail-keywords-increase-search-traffic/<br />
<br />
http://www.wordtracker.com/academy/three-good-reasons-to-target-long-tail-keywords/<br />
<br />
http://www.marketinghub.info/long-tail-versus-short-tail-keywords/<br />
<br />
Here is a general article on keywords: http://www.softnik.com/download/kwprimer.pdf<br />
<br />
Here are two popular software tools (both have a free trial membership) to find the long-tail keywords and popular keywords but there are FREE options of this software given below (which are not as full featured as their paid counterparts):<br />
<br />
1. Wordtracker has a free trial membership: [http://affiliate.wordtracker.com/r/699/a/157758/l/hp4kv6 Free Trial membership of Wordtracker]<br />
<br />
2. [http://www.keyworddiscovery.com/ Keyword Discovery]<br />
<br />
<br />
Keywords are a '''VERY''' important concept in terms of bringing web traffic to a website and the well known SEO expert Aaron Wall wrote a book on this subject that you can obtain [http://www.wordtracker.com/offers/kickass/ HERE.]<br />
<br />
==Other Important Suggestions==<br />
<br />
Now if your website is strong enough you can start going after the more popular searches. How do you know if your website is strong enough? Well if your website is somewhere between weak and strong and cannot decide if you are ready to go after the popular searches, I am willing to do a quick analysis of your website so you can follow the appropriate tactic in terms of pursuing popular keywords or pursuing long-tail keywords. <br />
<br />
Now if you know you have a sufficiently strong website then here are some tips on ranking high for a popular search terms: <br />
<br />
1. The article should have a very broad audience. For example, an article about the Apostle Paul is going to going to have more broad appeal than an article about a local pastor (No disrespect intended for the fine individuals who serve as local pastors). '''One of the keys to getting your article to the top of the search engines is the amount of GLOBAL links to your articles.''' Now given that a very large percentage of English speaking internet users are Americans it is suicide to be anti-American in your article. At the same time, you want English speakers from England, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and India, and other countries to link to your articles. A way to optimize global links to your articles is to have the weight of your articles mention American events and American experts the most but also cite experts from England, New Zealand, Australia, and even non-English speaking countries where translations are available. In addition, mention other notable events/trends/statistics etc in other continents nations as well - '''particularly English speaking countries as these will be your main audience'''. There are a lot of Americans who do want to know about the rest of the world although there is certainly Americans who do not really care unfortunately. I generally stick to talking about the Western World in my articles as I think this will gain the most English speaking readers. However, recently I found some good information on Google South Africa that applied to the Western world and to South Africa. <br />
<br />
So how do you easily do research in regards to other english speaking countries? Well I am not a librarian but I can tell you that I have easily found some absolutely great information by using Google Canada, Google UK, Google Ireland, Google Australia, Google New Zealand. It has been my experience that if you create a high ranking article at Google USA that it has the greatest effect on the other English speaking Google rankings. I believe this is due to Google USA having the greatest amount of users compared to the other English speaking Google search sites. Also, I have found that if you cite highly ranked articles in Google UK and Google Canada it is certainly not going to hurt your article search engine rankings in Google USA and will likely help! If you are at a English speaking Google website, you need to click the option below the Google search box where you see only pages from that country in question. I believe that using other English speaking countries Google search websites was a key tactic I used to find a piece of information in regards to making on of my most popular conservative articles on the internet as popular as it was (ranked #2 by Google out of 103,500,000 million articles). I am an American and I found a key piece of information for my popular article at Google New Zealand. <br />
<br />
If you reside in America, let me give you some resources Here are some recommended Google websites to do searches at:<br />
<br />
Google UK: http://www.google.co.uk/ (click the option pages from the UK)<br />
<br />
Google Canada: http://www.google.ca/ (click the option pages from Canada)<br />
<br />
Google Ireland: http://www.google.ie/<br />
<br />
Google Australia: http://www.google.com.au/<br />
<br />
Google New Zealand: http://www.google.co.nz/<br />
<br />
Google India: http://www.google.co.in/<br />
<br />
Google South Africa: http://www.google.co.za/<br />
<br />
<br />
The most important factor in getting your article to be top ranked by the search engines is by having high quality relevant content. By searching other English speaking countries articles you increase your chances of gaining a top search engine ranked article through superior research in terms of your articles content. <br />
<br />
2. Again, the primary goal should be creating quality content. People are often much more likely to link to quality content than low quality content and inbound links are very important to gaining top Google rankings. Also, Google clocks how much time readers spend in an article and this partly determines your google ranking. Quality content encourages people to keep reading. Do NOT make any claims you do not reasonably support in the article. Readers will often blow off such an article and not read the rest of the article when they read such a claim or claims. This will reduce the amount of time they spend in your article and your Google rank will needlessly suffer. Plus people will often not be as likely to link to such articles which will greatly hurt your search engine rankings. Also, nothing will infuriate the opponents of an article more than an article than does not make unreasonable claims. This will create internet buzz/publicity for your article. Also cite your sources and do so via footnotes rather than bibliographies which are much less user friendly. Please keep in mind that Google ranks the links that you link to in an article. Obviously it is better to cite an authoratative website than Joe's blog.<br />
<br />
<br />
3. Have a strong opening that makes a reader curious to know more and put the most relevant and interesting information at the top of the article and try to make a orderly progression to the article. Remember Google clocks the amount of time people spend in an article in regards to how it ranks an article.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
4. Handle some of the more important objections to a position (for example, pro-life) when it is reasonable to do so. Avoid petty objections. Also, make reasonable concessions regarding a position (and again, while providing reasonable rebuttals of objections if possible ) and when writing about a person or movement point out the foibles of people when it is appropriate to do so as it is better they find out about these from the article than from other websites (obviously you do not want to major on the minors and talk about a parking ticket the person received). Gaining readers trust is vitally important and trust has to be earned. The Bible often points out the notable foibles of its main individuals and so should the article you are writing or helping to write.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
5. As of November 30, 2007 the company http://www.google.com had about 78% percent of the market share for search engine traffic. (see: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=4 ). If it is realistic given a cost/benefit analysis, set a goal that you or your team are going to reach the top 3 Google results for a web search because the top 3 Google rankings get the most web traffic. At the very least you or your team want to be in the top 4-7 results. I think an appropriate nickname for the Apostle Paul is the nickname "all out Paul" due to his zeal. You want to have Apostle Paul like fire in your belly when you shoot for top Google rankings. <br />
<br />
<br />
6. Once you or your team pick an article topic find out what words or phrases people often or fairly often type in Google to search for information on a topic. These words and phrases are called Google keywords. A list of Google keywords is located here: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal <br />
<br />
<br />
7. Ideally the article title should be a Google keyword or keywords (phrase). The main keyword or keywords that the article is titled with should be used somewhat liberally throughout the article but it shouldn't be forced so it is very unnatural writing or the article will be penalized. The amount of times the article uses the Google keywords in a article is referred to as keyword frequency and it is easily implemented and easily measured (using a website). Here are some articles regarding the key word frequency how it effects webpage rankings with the search engines: <br />
<br />
http://www.firstpagefitness.com/blog/2006/07/14/keyword-denstity-versus-keyword-frequency/<br />
<br />
http://www.searchengineguide.com/beal/2003/0205_ab1.html<br />
<br />
http://www.bytestart.co.uk/content/promotion/7_6/keyword-density-why-keywo.shtml<br />
<br />
<br />
Here is the keyword frequency checker: http://www.seochat.com/seo-tools/keyword-density/<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
8. Use the list of Google keywords associated with the title of the article in your article in a reasonable way (see: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal) as this is very important. Do not "stuff' these words into the article but use the most natural keywords and do it in a reasonable way. An example of Google keyword stuffing would be having an article on "Communism" and having the following "sentence": <br />
Karl Marx socialist party marxism Soviet Union Karl Marx. The previous "sentence" was made up entirely of Google keywords and Google will heavily penalize for such gimics. <br />
<br />
<br />
9. Create sub articles which the main article links to and have these articles be Google keywords although certainly not all of the sub articles have to be google keywords (for example, you might cite an expert and have a short article on this expert). Having relevant, quality, and interesting content is key and don't be afraid to create sections in your article or sub articles attached to your main article that are not Google keyword related. The Google keywords merely tell you what the public is aware of and has a demand in knowing more about. If you or your team uncover relevant and interesting information that the public doesn't know about this will drive traffic to your article so again don't be afraid to create non-Google keyword material in your article or non Google keyword subarticles that are linked to your main article. <br />
<br />
In regards to the Google keyword sub articles, link these articles to the main article which you or your team are focused on making a Google top contender. The sub Google keyword(s) articles often are very popular and create traffic for your main article. Also, the main article creates traffic for your sub Google keyword articles. This creates a "vicious circle effect" in terms of creating webtraffic to the articles. You or your team might have to be a little patient as the Google web crawlers will likely find the main Google keyword article before it finds your sub Google keyword(s) articles. Please keep the use of Google keywords reasonable and natural in the article. The programmers of Google are not of low intelligence and I would think an article that uses every single Google keyword might be suspicious plus it would be very timne consuming to create quality articles for a myriad of google keywords. Also, this is would be likely gimicy and you might not be really focusing on creating relevant and quality information. Again relevancy and quality are of prime importance and should not be subordinated to the over use of Google keywords that may not be relevant to your article. You or your team can also look at the Google keywords for these sub keyword articles so these rank highly (again see: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal ). When appropriate also look up the google keywords for these sub Google keyword articles. For example, if you are writing an article on Communism you would create an article with the google keywords "Karl Marx" and look up the Google keywords for Karl Marx (again see: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal ). <br />
<br />
10. When you are creating Google keyword articles the Google keywords associated with a topic that are often but not always found here https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal is not all the Google keywords associated with a topic. So say for example, if you go to https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal you type in "widgets" you may NOT see that "widgets and wodgets" is a keyword phrase but if you type in "widgets and wodgets" you may see that "widgets and wodgets" is in fact a Google keyword phrase. If you download the program SEO FireFox which is located [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html here] it does offer a nice keyword tool that will be located directly below the Google search box when you do searches. <br />
<br />
<br />
11. Don't create a Google Keyword sub article until its ready. It is better to wait until you do further research and write a good Google sub keyword article rather than disappoint your readers with something of low quality. The same applies to your non-keyword articles but don't be afraid to create short bios of various people you cite. Keep the reputation of your article strong.<br />
<br />
12. When creating sub Google keyword articles it is vitally important that these articles are not 17% or more similar to your main Google keywords articles or 17% or more similar to other articles on your website. Google heavily filters out/penalizes articles that are too similar (see: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/09/demystifying-duplicate-content-penalty.html and http://www.searchenginejournal.com/duplicate-content-penalty-how-to-lose-google-ranking-fast/1886/ ). '''This is a very important point and should not be neglected.''' <br />
<br />
<br />
'''Here is a website to check how similar the articles created are to other webpages''' so you avoid the duplicate content penalty: http://www.webconfs.com/duplicate-content-filter-article-1.php<br />
<br />
<br />
13. It is perfectly acceptable to use information in other articles and to quote them. However, do not make the main Google keyword article or the sub Google keyword articles 17% or more similar to the sources used (see step #8 above). Again this is a very important issue.<br />
<br />
<br />
14. In relation to conservative articles or articles on conservative websites, do not rely on the press or blogs or internet forums to generate traffic for an article unless you plan on posting on some of the big blogs or forums. If a topical area has very prominent blogs or forums and you post on them it can provide a boost for your articles and create internet buzz. If the article is an issue article post on both liberal and conservative blogs. However, this step should only be used to kick start an already good article as may only create a short term effect. Kick starting an article can be important because once the targeted audiences are initially reached word of mouth can sustain an article. Also, given that the majority of the press is liberal it is wishful thinking to believe the liberal press will be of much help for conservative articles or articles at a conservative website. If it happens that is great but consider that icing on the cake. Often the blogs find out about an article because it has a fairly high profile via the search engines which are generating traffic for the article. <br />
<br />
<br />
15. One excellent key to getting a top ranked search engine article is to have unique information in your article. As mentioned earlier by searching Google New Zealand I was able to find some key information in relation to a conservative article that was not widely known in English speaking countries although it was a top ranked article in New Zealand for the topic. In addition, by doing other research using both internet and print sources I was able to create unique content in the Conservapedia homosexuality article which is a top ranked article on the internet for the topic homosexuality. If you create some unique material in your article people will be more likely to cite your article with a link. <br />
<br />
16. Incorporate pictures in the article as this gives the article a professional appearance <br />
<br />
Here are some sources for finding pictures:<br />
<br />
http://www.pdphoto.org<br />
<br />
http://images.google.com/imghp?tab=wi<br />
<br />
http://www.usa.gov/<br />
<br />
http://www.yahoo.com/ (look at the top center of the page )<br />
<br />
http://digital.nypl.org/mmpco/index.cfm<br />
<br />
http://karenswhimsy.com/public-domain-images/<br />
<br />
NASA and USGS photos <br />
<br />
http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/amer_pol_hist/_use.htm<br />
<br />
<br />
When I created some of the most popular articles on the internet for various hot button social issues I knew absolutely nothing about search engine optimization (SEO) for images/pictures on a website. So please do not worry if you do not understand the pieces of advice in the articles below on search engine optimization and images on your webpages as some of the advice is somewhat technical. However, since SEO is a largely a game of inches gained rather than knockout blows here are some articles on SEO and images:<br />
<br />
http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3626884<br />
<br />
http://www.marketposition.com/blog/archives/2006/12/seo_for_images.html <br />
<br />
http://www.ducttapemarketing.com/blog/2008/03/30/using-images-in-seo/<br />
<br />
http://www.naturalsearchblog.com/archives/2006/03/22/need-more-traffic-try-image-search-optimization/<br />
<br />
http://www.phoenixrealm.com/image-rank-factors/<br />
<br />
http://www.problogger.net/archives/2005/03/12/formatting-images-for-seo/<br />
<br />
http://www.blogohblog.com/tips-to-speed-up-your-blog/<br />
<br />
http://www.theukwebdesigncompany.com/articles/image-file-size.php<br />
<br />
http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/category/photo-optimization/<br />
<br />
http://seofuture.blogspot.com/2007/03/optimize-image-for-search-engine.html<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
17. Put links to your articles on webpages on the website that the article resides on when it makes sense to do so. Your key articles should be accessible within 3 clicks on your main page. <br />
<br />
<br />
18. Have a proofreader or proofreaders look over your article. I have been told there is a woman who will do this for free for conservative websites and I am going to try to contact her. <br />
<br />
<br />
19. Call or email other websites that are related to the website article and have them link to the main article and/or sub articles associated with the article. Often this can make a big difference although I would not rely on it. Wait until your article is of good quality before you do this.<br />
<br />
20. Here is an email I received from a internet search engine expert regarding the above 17 steps: Your blueprint looks good. I would add that it is important for Google to view your site as authoritative and as a hub – that is done by externals links with keyword phrase you are targeting as anchor text. For instance if you are writing an article on “Darwin’s theory of evolution” – have links to high-authority websites – like http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com with the anchor text being something like “Darwin’s Theory of Evolution” or “Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution” or “Theory of Evolution.” It is important to occasionally vary the anchor text to external articles or you will receive an over-optimization penalty. <br />
<br />
21. Periodically look at the talk pages for the article and incorporate reasonable suggestions. Also, if you post links to your articles in internet forums or blogs you can get useful feedback. <br />
<br />
<br />
Here is an interesting article for those who are interested in creating an article which gets a lot of internet traffic: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/a-little-piece-of-the-google-algorithm-revealed<br />
http://proof.sitesell.com/victory4.html<br />
<br />
==A word of warning==<br />
If any of the websites I cited recommend using a submission service or submission software to submit your website to the search engines don't do it. Doing this could get your website banned by search engines. I believe that submitting your websites to various search engines is a complete waste of time. Please read: http://www.webcredible.co.uk/user-friendly-resources/search-engine-optimisation/submit-search-engines.shtml<br />
<br />
==Getting Links to your website==<br />
A very important part of getting your website to rank higher for the search engines is getting more website to link to you. About 65% of getting your webpage to rank high for Google is determined by the amount and types of links that link to you. The other 35% is determined by on-page factors (keyword frequency/density, etc. etc. ). <br />
<br />
==General Overview About Websites Linking to your website or article==<br />
http://www.marketleap.com/help/seo101/linkpopularity.htm<br />
<br />
==Viral Buzz and Viral Marketing Links==<br />
<br />
Free:<br />
<br />
http://www.copyblogger.com/how-to-get-huge-viral-buzz-for-your-start-up/<br />
<br />
http://buzzmarketingfortech.blogspot.com/2007/04/how-to-mine-blogosphere-podcast-with.html<br />
<br />
http://buzzmarketingfortech.blogspot.com/2007/05/5-rules-of-social-media-optimization.html<br />
<br />
http://goviral.com/viralradar.php<br />
<br />
http://www.wilsonweb.com/wmt5/viral-principles.htm<br />
<br />
http://www.baekdal.com/articles/Branding/viral-marketing-tricks/<br />
<br />
http://www.davidmeermanscott.com/documents/Viral_Marketing.pdf<br />
<br />
http://www.dfj.com/cgi-bin/artman/publish/steve_tim_may97.shtml<br />
<br />
http://www.wilsonweb.com/cat/cat.cfm?page=1&subcat=mm_viral<br />
<br />
http://www.webinknow.com/2008/01/the-new-rules-o.html<br />
<br />
http://marketing.about.com/od/viralmarketing/Viral_Marketing.htm<br />
<br />
http://www.tamingthebeast.net/articles/viralmarketing.htm<br />
<br />
==Highly Suggest Getting these Non-Free Articles on Linking and Other Important Subject==<br />
SEOmoz is a Seattle-based SEO company and it serves as a hub for search marketers worldwide. SEOMOZ provides education, tools, resources and paid services. <br />
<br />
I think the most important resource that SEOMOZ provides is their main SEO articles that are designed for beginners. I suggest signing up for the SEOMOZ program for a month and copying their articles which are labeled beginner and essentials articles. The cost for a month's membership is $49. I was able to help solve a very big problem a client of mine had through a small article I found at SEOMOZ. <br />
<br />
As far as their tools, I like rank checker which is a free tool. I also like their keyword difficulty tool which is not a free tool. I only used their Juicy link finder tool once but it did give me a excellent lead to a keyword category through one of the links it listed. I don't like their Trifecta tool. <br />
<br />
Please go to this link to go to the SEOMOZ website:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.pntrs.com/t/Qj1BR0FFPUFFSERHPUNFQg SEOmoz offers professional, step-by-step guides that will teach you strategies and tactics necessary to improve your site's traffic.]<br />
<br />
=="Link Baiting"==<br />
<br />
I realize that the term "link baiting" is rather uncouth sounding and it conjures up that the notion that you are engaging in unpalatable methods to gain web traffic. However, please do not avoid using this powerful technique to gain web traffic merely due to its name. Link baiting is merely creating content that is very useful to people (for example, a medical organization or life insurance company might create a internet longevity calculator with longevity tips) or that challenges people's ideas in such a way that it causes discussion across the internet and linking to your website. There are other methods of link baiting as well. I believe this is an important concept so I have provided multiple links.<br />
<br />
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/link-baiting-effective-link-building/2797/<br />
<br />
http://www.problogger.net/archives/2006/09/19/an-introduction-to-linkbaiting/<br />
<br />
http://www.jimwestergren.com/link-bait/<br />
<br />
http://performancing.com/promotion/links/the-art-of-linkbaiting<br />
<br />
http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3623287<br />
<br />
http://www.lunametrics.com/emarketing/search-engine-optimization/what-is-link-bait.php<br />
<br />
http://www.bruceclay.com/blog/archives/2007/12/link_baiting_96.html<br />
<br />
http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/004349.html<br />
<br />
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/link-ninjas-vs-bait-pirates<br />
<br />
==Link Building vs. Link Baiting==<br />
Link Building (called link Ninja in a below article) is where you ask other websites to link to you and the advantage is that you can directly ask key websites to link to you. Also, you can control better what anchor text links are from websites linking to you. For example, if you have a canary article you want the hypertext that links to you to have the word canary in it. When link building you want to vary the anchor text to keep the search engines happy. So on some websites you might have the word "canary" when link building but on other websites you have the words "canary article" or "excellent canary article". I am just starting out as far as link building and I am being conservative and just doing a handful of links of high Google PageRank value (please install the Google toolbar here: http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/toolbar/FT3/intl/en/index.html ) that are an exact match (for example, canary). If you use a combination of link baiting and link building this should be less of an issue. I plan on learning more about this issue. My guess is that you don't want to have a very compressed time period where you are adding links with anchor text that exactly matches your Google keyword (for example, canary) or the search engines will frown upon this (you don't want to get the search engines mad at you). In addition, I am guessing that perhaps a good rule of thumb is to look at a fair amount of the high search engine ranked websites for a particular keyword and then use [http://www.pjatr.com/t/RD9JQ0dIP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI SEO Spyglass] to see what anchor text percentages are for the websites that link to them and then somewhat mimic these webpages in terms of the anchor text for the websites that link to you so you are not penalized by the search engines. I am guessing that for anchor text that does not match the keyword you are trying to rank high for that you want to have many variations of the anchor text that do not exactly match your keyword. As far as using comparative analysis using [http://www.pjatr.com/t/RD9JQ0dIP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI SEO Spyglass] I suppose that Google could penalize all the top rated websites for a search term but I think this would be unlikely. The issue of anchor text is expanded on in a subsequent section of this webpage which deals with a natural link profile. <br />
<br />
Here are some articles on the issue of linking building versus link baiting:<br />
<br />
http://www.jimboykin.com/link-bait-alone-wont-do-it-you-need-link-ninjas/<br />
<br />
http://www.jimboykin.com/expert-link-building-can-be-fun/<br />
<br />
When link building you want to have the websites link to you from webpages at the site that is linking to you that have the highest Google PageRank if they are gracious enough to do so or it makes sense for them to do so to help offer quality and relevant material on a particular webpage of their website (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank ). Too see what the Google PageRank for a website is you can install the Google Toolbar to your computer (see: http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/toolbar/FT3/intl/en/index.html ).<br />
<br />
Various types of websites to get links from:<br />
<br />
1. Get links from the top Google ranked websites for your search term or similar search terms<br />
<br />
2. Post links at topic related forums.<br />
<br />
3. Post links at topic related blogs. Here are some resources for posting at blogs:<br />
<br />
Use the search box at http://technorati.com/ to find recent blog postings for various topics.<br />
<br />
Here are some additional resources and tips:<br />
<br />
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/20-essential-blog-directories-to-submit-your-blog-to/5998/<br />
<br />
http://blogsearch.google.com/<br />
<br />
http://blogsearch.google.co.uk/<br />
<br />
<br />
Since .edu domain websites carry more weight at the search engines you can do an advanced Google search to find .edu domain blogs that will give you more weight when you post to them. I would not overdo this and try to put a whole lot of edu blog post in a short time and this will later be explained in the natural link profile section of this resource. <br />
<br />
Here is how you do it:<br />
<br />
1. First got to http://www.google.com/<br />
<br />
2. Then click on advanced search which is here: http://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en<br />
<br />
Now supposing you wanted blogs related to atheism at edu domain websites. <br />
<br />
You would put the words atheism at Find web pages that have...<br />
<br />
all these words: atheism<br />
<br />
Then you would put the word blog at one of the three boxes here:<br />
<br />
one or more of these words: blog<br />
<br />
Now some edu blogs will allow anyone to post to them but some insist that you have a special log on.<br />
<br />
===HTML BLOGS Links VS NON-HTML Blog Links===<br />
Some blogs insists that you use HTML coding to put in a link and other blogs won't allow you to use HTML. Often you can use a preview button to test out your post.<br />
<br />
Here is how you do HTML type links:<br />
<br />
HTML<br />
<br />
Let us say you wanted to have the hypertext for the link be the words Jesus is God so when they clicked the words Jesus is God in a sentence it would go to your website. Here is how you would do it using HTML coding:<br />
<br />
Christian state that <br />
<a href="http://www.whoisjesus-really.com/">Jesus is God.</a><br />
<br />
<br />
Here is another example which would would the hypertext link "Is Jesus God?"<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.whoisjesus-really.com/">Is Jesus God?</a><br />
<br />
<br />
Now if a blog does not allow HTML you can simply post the following at a blog:<br />
<br />
John, I think you raised a good point. And the central issue here is the issue of whether Jesus Christ is God. I think the following resource will be helpful in answering the question of whether or not Jesus is God: <br />
http://www.whoisjesus-really.com<br />
<br />
==Natural Link Profile==<br />
I have not fully investigated the importance of having a natural link profile for a website or wegpage by my educated guess is that this is an important issue. I am also guessing that as time goes on it will become a more important issue.<br />
<br />
Here are some resources regarding having a natural link profile for a website of webpage:<br />
<br />
http://yoast.com/click-here-to-read-all-about-a-natural-link-profile/<br />
<br />
http://indexedcontent.com/featured/building-a-natural-link-profile/<br />
<br />
http://www.jenniferslegg.com/2008/04/28/creating-natural-link-profile/<br />
<br />
http://www.imjuk.com/2008/03/natural-vs-unnatural-link-profiles-in-link-development/<br />
<br />
http://www.seo-scientist.com/natural-link-building.html<br />
<br />
==Links, Search Engines, and Context - Link Reputation==<br />
Some of the things that modern search engines measure in relation to your website pages are the following:<br />
<br />
<br />
1. keyword density/Frequency <br />
<br />
2. The type and number of links pointing to your webpage. Keeping in mind the issue of a natural link profile mentioned above another thing that is important is to consider the page reputation of the link that is pointing to your webpage. <br />
<br />
Here is are two articles on link reputation which is the reputation of the page that is linking to you: http://www.sitepoint.com/article/whats-your-link-reputation/ and http://www.evancarmichael.com/SEO/1279/Link-Reputation-and-Your-Website.html A key point in these articles is that Google and other search engines look at the context of the page linking to you. In other words, if a webpage having a very high Google PageRank (lots of strong webpages linking to it) links to you may not necessarily help you rank high for the search clams if the webpage focuses on zebras (text on page is regarding zebras and zebra related sites linking to that page). I am guessing if you have lots of high Google PageRank unrelated articles to your webpage that this could cause you to have a unnatural link profile. In addition, all other things remaining equal strong websites that are OLD websites carry more weight than new websites that link to you. Of course, the best possible situation is if you can get a old contextually relevant webpage with a high Google PageRank to link to you (high PageRank very roughly means that lots of webpages link to it and/or several webpages linking to the page that have many webpages linking to it). <br />
<br />
Recently, I ranked very high for an extremely competitive search. One of the things I did was create an excellent article and them I emailed or call the owners of the websites or webpages that were in www.dmoz.org for this topic and I got a high percentage of them to link to me. Since www.dmoz.org is highly regarded by the search engines, I believe this is definitely one of the factors that got me to rank high for this search term. I would also recommend contacting related websites that were in http://botw.org/ and get them to also link to your webpage since this website is also influential in regards to search engine rankings.<br />
<br />
In addition, one way links are stronger than reciprocal links. So ideally try to get websites to link to you without you linking back to them.<br />
<br />
What if an authoratative topical webpage refuses to link to you? Well one thing you can do is to use the [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox] and [http://www.link-assistant.com/go/?get=seoguy777&app=sg SEO Spyglass] programs to get the key webpages that link to them to link to you. Sometimes these webpages will not link to you. No problem. Get the key webpages that link to them to link to you. Well what if these webpages refuse to link to you? Well I have not carried it out this far yet but you certainly can get the key webpages that link to these webpages to link to you. In other words, aggressively go after the supporting links of your competitors.<br />
<br />
==Link Popularity Check==<br />
I have found that a good and reliable way to see how many webpages link to your webpage relative to other pages is by using SEO Firefox which is a free program and you can get it here: http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html<br />
<br />
<br />
Here is a website that will tell you how many links your website has: http://www.urltrends.com/<br />
<br />
<br />
http://www.marketleap.com/publinkpop/ (this website is sort of flaky when it comes to telling you how many links your URL or website has as far as what it shows at any given time. Perhaps this is due to a website being up or down though as the website I was mainly interested in had technical problems when I used this tool. However, it does seem to provide reliable access to the Google and Yahoo links that it does show. For example, it might say your URL only has 257 yahoo links when it actually has 1,202 yahoo links. However, the 257 links it does show will likely be accessible when you click on Yahoo or Google links. One good thing is you can use this tool to see links your competitor has and then get them to link to you.<br />
<br />
A more reliable checker of how many links a URL has is by using this program: http://www.seoquake.com/ However, it often only shows the number of Google and Yahoo links when you do your first search using a search engine and then on a later search during a internet session it will show zeros for these as far as a search for your article using a search engine. Also, you can click on the number given for the Google or yahoo links and then it will give you the specific links that are listed. Using the "who is" function you can find the telephone number or email for a website administrator and then ask him/her to link to you.<br />
<br />
Here is a link for Yahoo explorer to see how many links they have linking to your webpage and just put the URL with the standard http:// prefix before your website's URL if appropriate: https://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com/mysites<br />
<br />
<br />
==Free SEO Videos by SEO expert Aaron Wall==<br />
Here are some free videos by SEO expert Aaron Wall:<br />
<br />
[http://www.seobook.com/4515-9-3-31.html Free Videos by SEO expert Aaron Wall]<br />
<br />
==Popular SEO Blog by SEO Expert Aaron Wall==<br />
Here is a popular SEO blog by SEO expert Aaron Wall that is reported to get over a million views a month:<br />
<br />
[http://www.seobook.com/4515-6-3-26.html Aaron Wall's SEO blog]<br />
<br />
==YouTube Videos On SEO and Website Marketing Tips==<br />
<br />
How to Start an Internet Business - Video 1 of 10 (watch all 10 vieeos as I think it is well done)<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEU_Nw_3Qms<br />
<br />
12 Search Engine Marketing Campaign Mistakes To Avoid <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUpcecRIiAU&feature=related<br />
<br />
SEO - Title Tags, Anchor Text, Duplicate Title Tag Problems, Total Amount of Link Authority, Strength of Domain<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmwCcD-J9eY<br />
<br />
SEOmoz Whiteboard Friday - Everybody Wants to Rule The SERPs <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdhtU-n-le4<br />
<br />
Whiteboard Friday - Chasing Your Tail <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cclbcUJ7HUc<br />
<br />
A Guide to Link Bait<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyt7hIqQa8I<br />
<br />
How to Use Social Bookmarking: Building Traffic & Your List <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGbMx0JTWFc&feature=related<br />
<br />
Whiteboard Friday - Wiki-Wiki-Wiki WHACK! <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSi60Zj6JXU&feature=related<br />
<br />
Endrunning the search engines<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSEjKBprrHs&feature=related<br />
<br />
Whiteboard Friday - Why Your Viral Content Isn't Working <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrFXyFhspNY&feature=related<br />
<br />
Whiteboard Friday - The Juice is Loose <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ_XlhdzPVU&feature=related<br />
<br />
Whiteboard Friday - Every Blog Has Its Way <br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWLZX3LZHuM<br />
<br />
==Tips on Getting More Web Traffic to a Blog==<br />
Here are some use tips on how to get more web traffic to a blog:<br />
<br />
21 Tactics to Increase Blog Traffic<br />
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/21-tactics-to-increase-blog-traffic<br />
<br />
Search Engine Optimization for Blogs - SEO<br />
http://www.problogger.net/archives/2005/08/15/search-engine-optimization-for-blogs/<br />
<br />
20 Essential Blog Directories to Submit Your Blog To<br />
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/20-essential-blog-directories-to-submit-your-blog-to/5998/<br />
<br />
3 Things To Check Before Submitting Your Post To StumbleUpon<br />
http://www.bloggingtips.com/2008/07/05/3-things-to-check-before-submitting-your-post-to-stumbleupon/<br />
<br />
Blogging tips (directories are important for SEO if done right, ignore what he states)<br />
http://www.thetlog.net/the-blogging-tips-series/<br />
<br />
21 Surefire Tips for a Successful Blog Launch<br />
http://www.avivadirectory.com/successful-blog-launch/<br />
<br />
Bloggers and the Law<br />
http://www.avivadirectory.com/blogger-law/<br />
<br />
<br />
==Free SEO Software - Keyword Research Tools==<br />
*[http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox has an excellent Keyword Tracker (Once you install SEO Firefox look at the KW Research Link below your search engines search box] <br />
*[http://www.submitexpress.com/keytracker.php Submit Express Keyword tracker]<br />
*[http://affiliate.wordtracker.com/r/699/a/157758/l/v42ax8 Free Keyword tool by Wordtracker]<br />
*[http://www.keyworddiscovery.com/search.html Keyword Discovery Tool]<br />
*[http://www.selfseo.com/keyword_suggestion_tool.php SelfSEO Keyword Suggestion Tool]<br />
<br />
==Pulling Web Traffic from the websites of your key competitors ==<br />
There is a product called SEO Digger which is free to use although you will get faster results you upgrade to their premium membership. <br />
If you want to find out what keywords/search phrases a competitors website ranks high for at Google and compete with them on those keywords you can use a program called SEO Digger. You can see how popular those keywords or search phrases are and then decide if you want to compete with them. <br />
<br />
Here is a free seminar on SEO Digger: http://www.kewego.com/video/iLyROoafYwLT.html<br />
<br />
Here is the SEO Digger website:<br />
http://seodigger.com/<br />
<br />
Here is one of the alternatives to SEO Digger: http://spyfu.com/<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==SEO Training Classes==<br />
Aaron Wall offers online training classes for SEO and internet marketing and his material has been endorsed by the prestigious Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania which is one of the top business schools in the United States. In addition, Aaron Wall has appeared in the major media like the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, Forbes, CNN, CNBC, etc. <br />
<br />
You can sign up here for his classes: [http://www.seobook.com/4515.html Aaron Wall's SEO Training Courses]<br />
<br />
Aaron Wall offers excellent resources. I LOVE his SEO FireFox software program which is offered for free [http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html HERE] !!! A small word of caution though. Although I have not personally participated in the SEO forum at Aaron Wall's website I suspect that some of the people there may be knowledgeable. However, do not take as gospel truth everything you read by the forum participants because unfortunately there is a great plentitude of people in the SEO community who do NOT know what they are doing. While the signal to noise ratio (good advice to bad advice) is much likely better than at most forums at Aaron Wall's website, I would not put a lot of stock in what you read at SEO forums on the internet. I am writing this word of caution because the gentleman who has provided me with SEO training has told me to not put any stock in what you read at SEO forums on the internet as most participants don't know really what they are doing in terms of their SEO knowledge. In other words, they have not truly rigorously tested their advice to see if it is sound.<br />
<br />
==Other Free SEO Software Tools==<br />
<br />
*[http://www.seobook.com/4515-8-3-28.html SE0 Firefox] (please watch the short video and please get this)<br />
*[http://www.seoquake.com/ SEO Quake] (please get this)<br />
<br />
*[http://www.pjatr.com/t/RD9JQ0dIP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI SEO Spyglass] (they offer a free limited function version of this for pay software package and I would recommend looking over the free version at the very least. I used the free version of this software package to help get me to the top of a extremely competitive search term. It is definitely one of my favorite SEO software packages. The paid version is only $87 and well worth the investment as it does so much more than the free version. <br />
<br />
*[http://www.webceo.com/cgi-bin/go/clickthru.cgi?id=seoman777 WEBCEO] (please do not use the search engine submission feature of WEB SEO )<br />
<br />
Other free SEO software solutions:<br />
<br />
*[http://tools.seobook.com/ Free Search Engine Optimization Tools]<br />
*[http://www.seomoz.org/ SeoMoz.org Seo Tools]<br />
*[http://www.linkvendor.com/ Link Vendor Free SEO Tools]<br />
*[http://seocompany.ca/tool/seo-tools.html 136 SEO Tools] (some worked for me and others did not)<br />
*[http://www.webuildpages.com/tools/ Free Internet Marketing and Search Engine Optimization Tools]<br />
*[http://www.socialseo.com/the-top-15-free-seo-tools.html TOP 15 SEO Tools]<br />
*[http://www.seo-expert-blog.com/blog/ultimate-collection-of-free-seo-tools Ultimate Collection of Free SEO Tools]<br />
*[http://www.beanstalk-inc.com/tools/ BeanStalk Free SEO Tools] Link Suggestion tools looks poor but others tools look good<br />
*[http://www.devppl.com/msnbetarankings.php MSN Rank Checker]<br />
<br />
==Excellent Non-Free SEO Software==<br />
<br />
*[http://www.pjatr.com/t/RD9JQ0dIP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI SEO SpyGlass]<br />
<br />
Since the SEO Spyglass in an excellent product you might want to check out these packages as well by the same company:<br />
<br />
*[http://www.gopjn.com/t/RD9JQ0dFP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI Link Assistant]<br />
<br />
*[http://www.gopjn.com/t/RD9JQ0dGP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI Rank Tracker]<br />
<br />
*[http://www.gopjn.com/t/RD9JQ0dLP0NHSkZJP0NESkJI WebSite Auditor]<br />
<br />
==Social Media Optimization==<br />
Here are some websites which explain what social media optimization is and how to use it to gain more web trafic:<br />
<br />
http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3630690<br />
<br />
http://www.pronetadvertising.com/articles/a-comparison-of-seo-and-smo.html<br />
<br />
http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/014603.html<br />
<br />
http://vandelaydesign.com/blog/social-media/seo-vs-smo/<br />
<br />
http://www.seo-scoop.com/2008/06/30/seo-vs-smo-traffic-quality-test/<br />
<br />
http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/social-media/social-media-optimization/<br />
<br />
http://www.zeroonezero.com/design/index.php/search-engine-marketing-and-optimization/1474/<br />
<br />
http://www.doshdosh.com/beginners-guide-to-social-news-sites/<br />
<br />
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/social-media-answers-sites/7233/<br />
<br />
http://www.scribd.com/doc/69260/SEO-vs-SMO-A-Graphical-Analysis<br />
<br />
http://www.seobook.com/can-you-trust-marketing-statistics <br />
<br />
http://social-media-optimization.com/<br />
<br />
http://www.britopian.com/2007/01/27/treating-social-media-optimization-as-another-distribution-channel/<br />
<br />
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/SEO_vs_SMO.html<br />
<br />
http://www.steve-olson.com/one-huge-reason-reddit-is-better-than-digg/ (websites with controversial content)<br />
<br />
http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/why-reddit-stumbleupon-are-better-than-digg/<br />
<br />
http://www.doshdosh.com/a-comprehensive-guide-to-stumbleupon-how-to-build-massive-traffic-to-your-website-and-monetize-it/<br />
<br />
http://www.bloggingtips.com/2008/07/26/5-things-you-shouldn%E2%80%99t-do-when-using-any-social-site/<br />
<br />
http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2008/04/28/seo-or-social-media-which-is-more-important/<br />
<br />
==Possible Very Excellent Shawn Pringle Web Video Product that Appears to Be Endorsed by a Church==<br />
*[http://www.easywebvideo.com/ Easy Web Video] This product appears to make putting videos on your website much easier. It appears to be endorsed by a Church in Minnesota that has a website<br />
==How to Optimize Local Organization/Church Profiles for Free Local Directories==<br />
<br />
Here is an excellent article on this subject:<br />
<br />
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/how-to-optimize-local-business-profiles-for-free-local-directories/6739/<br />
<br />
==Important Request==<br />
Please only let people who believe in biblical Christianity know about this resource. I don't want this resource to be used to help spread false ideologies and religions.</div>Manchuria