Jump to content

Talk:Bread of Life Ministries International

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


Major Re-write. Collaboration Encouraged

[edit]

Greetings! I am in the process of cleaning up this article. I am more than happy to collaborate with anyone who is willing to help. If you are going to undo the changes, please know that the admins will revert it back if you do not have any valid reasons for doing so. This already happened to user 125.60.164.2, based in Makati, Philippines. For most of the edits, I am using Saddleback Church as a template of sorts (per Truthspeaketh's suggestion).

Sign me up. I will help. What do you want to do?(Bicolexpress (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Good job with the references. I will participate every now and then. This is a huge improvement over the previous versions. Just a suggestion, why not create a Core Belief section. This way, you can objectively include what the church believes in without becoming too preachy.(Truthspeaketh (talk) 20:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Good morning! I agree with Truthspeaketh, God and Country should be placed under Core Beliefs. (Bicolexpress (talk) 22:08, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

For the intro section, I changed verbiage of membership to attendance since it is not clear if the number refers to total membership. I believe the more accurate number is to say that it has 15,000 (not 25,000) in regular weekly attendance. I also re-grouped the order of affiliate congregation location based on the logical grouping stated in the church website. As a side note, I removed information about Myungsung Presbyterian Church in South Korea since there is no references to this. (I must say, for a church of this size, the church websites are poorly maintained. Lots of bad links. Most of the content is dated. Hard to navigate.). (Brownpipol (talk) 12:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Are all the entities in crossroad77.com non-for-profit? It seems the church is doing some commercial business as a "Lifestyle, Fitness and events management services" corporation. Smells fishy. (Bicolexpress (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Anonymous: In response to bicolexpresstalk's comments: Though I know for a fact that BOLM is directly connected to the said Korean Presbyterian Church, I shall wait until a document is released to prove such and will concur with your said change. The same is true with 15,000. That is taken from the BOLM USA website I believe and I think that site is outdated in certain portions. 15,000 is too safe and we might risk misrepresentation, but again, I shall await the official numbers on the BOLM official website. Which brings me to my third point. Their website is obviously unfinished and this changes annually I believe. Certain links will be lost. For the record, I am a Protestant in the Philippines who is affiliated with people who in turn are directly affiliated to BOLM. I wish to know if you bicol and the main editor are also from the Philippines or are wikipedia post editors from another country. This will explain a lot in what you may have known or not have known about the current Protestant movement in the Philippines. I shall be visiting your edits from time to time. Thank you and all the best in your work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.164.2 (talk) 12:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am a bread old timer. Honestly, I really do not care about the numbers. If you have been in Bread for a while, you will know about the Gideon principle. Quality before quantity. The reason I raised a concern about private entities, I am not really happy with the idea of commercialism in the church. I do not want to start rumors. Just curious. (Bicolexpress (talk) 22:42, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Updated history section with facts and dates. (Brownpipol (talk) 17:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I created a new section "Central Church Activities". (Bicolexpress (talk) 22:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

This is great! I'm really satisfied with the outcome of the consensus. The article is straight to the point. I'll no longer add some edits on this. For the God and Country section, since no citation can be provided, it can be omitted from the article altogether. As for Myung Sung Presbyterian, I know for a fact that BOLM is an ally (sister church) of the said denomination but then again I can't substantiate because of the lack of articles for citation, so I see this as an unnecessary addition.

I do not see the need also of reiterating the Core Beliefs of the church since their beliefs are encapsulated in the category "Evangelical Christian / Pentecostal Calvinist." Other main Protestant denominations in the Philippines in Wiki do not have their statement of faith listed on their wiki articles.

As for Crossroad 77, I think their concept of non-profit is the same as in other megachurches like CCF. Crossroad 77 is a self-supporting entity as a building (meaning all the rentals it receives sustains it, while the BOLM church has a financial support of its own, coming from the church members--thus being non-profit). Crossroad 77 in some sites are being referred to as "Crossroad 77 Convention Center" and thus implies that BOLM does not own the entire building but uses specific floors in the building. The church in the "Evangelical" sense is not the building, it's the people. People might ask, is financing the construction of the building the same as owning the building? It depends. I think BOLM built the building just so that they can have a reserved space for their regular church gatherings and events. The sites of the companies renting the building (as reiterated by the Crossroad77.com site) have by far no links referring to the said church's name and their site.

As for the link Brown Raise, no reference from the site can be said that it is linked with the church, so again it will be an unnecessary addition. Global Doors has one though.(Peridan (talk) 03:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Anonymous: I am also greatly pleased with this outcome and the civility with which it was accomplished. Congratulations to the pool of people who pegged in. I think even BOLM members will feel more than satisfied with this. Nice insight too peridan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.241.153 (talk) 23:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note to the consensus!Someone by the name of Misismac deleted the 'Controversy' section. I do not know the reason for that deletion but the facts there were well cited and balanced. Thus I undid 'her' deletion of the entire section. I did this so that no further edits of this section might harm the interest of the public and the church concerned. (Peridan (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the changes. I gave Misismac a level 2 warning.[1] (Brownpipol (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Core Beliefs/Major Activities

[edit]

I also removed the God and Country section, to be replaced with Core Beliefs. About Bread of Life and Politics... While it is true that Bread pastors do not officially endorse politicians, most of the pastors preach about scrupulous politicians in the pulpit. They do not name names, but place "blind item" anomalies. This happened specially during the time of ESDA Dos and Tres. To say that Bread is not involved in politics is simply not true. Back in the old days, I remember Pastor Conde campaigning against the US Bases. Plus, I remember all the bruhaha against Villanueva when he ran for president. You just have to read between the lines. (Bicolexpress (talk) 22:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

125.60.164.2 (talk) 08:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Anonymous: Yes, it is not apolitical (who isn't?) but it is not as politically active or engaged as say, JIL. BOLM is in a different box compared to JIL as you said, it is not explicit in its actions.[reply]

Anonymous: I am most satisfied with the changes. Great simplification done by the team. Things are better now that we have an inside in bicol doing the changes. I think it is important to have an old-timer member in the discussion because that person understands CONTEXT which we do not fully know about in their case. Just some notes (and yes truthspeak, I am pitching in over the long run): I believe certain outreaches were erased such as ones in Southern Metro Manila (these are not part of the central church network if my memory serves me right). I also ask for a search on the definition of megachurches as far as numbers go. Does 15,000 already qualify for a megachurch? Isn't it supposed to be 25,000? I am not sure on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.164.2 (talk) 14:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

megachurch is defined to be a church having around 2,000 or more attendants for a typical weekly service. Plus a lot of sources recognize Bread of Life as a megachurch. I added some references. (Bicolexpress (talk) 14:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
125.60.164.2 (talk) 08:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Anonymous: only 2,000? Wow, then I am definitely misinformed here or is the definition that subjective? There is a recent book (Christianity's Dangerous Idea) that puts BOLM in the frontline of the Protestant movement in the Philippines along with the Jesus is Lord Church and the Christ's Commission Fellowship so any claim in the future that may suggest this is somewhat valid.[reply]

Anonymous:I also noticed bicol's comments on commercialism. I have been to Crossroad and have seen these establishments but I do not know exactly if the church profits from this or people affiliated with the church. Those are two separate matters. And lastly, I do know the Gideon principle though I could only hope that BOLM still lives up to that. The website, for the 2nd straight year in my recollection, a vital tool no less, is left unfinished. To me, that is quality suffering. Does BOLM tap its member base for these things? Anyhow, just a thought and I do not wish to start a thread on this. Great work guys! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.164.2 (talk) 14:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of Core Beliefs/ What makes them different from other Philippine evangelical churches. Here is what I have on my list:

a) importance of Prayer and Scripture 

  e.g launching prayer mountain, dawn watches.

b) separation of church and state 

  e.g article against Villanueva

c) improving of Filipino standards to be globally competitive 

  e.g launching Global Doors to reach out to OFWs. http://www.globaldoorsaustralia.org/about_gd.html
  Brown Raise: http://www.thebrownraise.org/

BTW, I just discovered a new website to Bread Australia http://www.breadoflifeaustralia.org/About-Us.php Bicolexpress (talk) 15:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

125.60.164.2 (talk) 08:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Anonymous: Does BOLM really give much emphasis on item "c" to level it with item "a" (core beliefs and principles?) I think it is too specific and perhaps can even be merged with item "b" under some heading perhaps under "the role of the church in the country/ church and country", just a thought. Also, doesn't BOLM have a definitive document on item "a" or what is called as a "statement of faith"? Also, can we remove all those flagging symbols from the article page already? It is discouraging.By the way, I added some missing outreaches. This is first-hand verifiable: Nueva Ecija and Aklan in the Philippines, NYC for the N.America section[reply]
item c is a big initiative. It has Global Doors for OFWs, More than Medals for Taekwondo, etc, all are meant to make the Filipino globally competitive. About moving the tags, I removed most of the tags. I will seek consensus if the article is ok. Let's see what brownpipol and the others say. (Bicolexpress (talk) 12:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
The article is much better. The tone and style is consistent with Wikipedia standards. Although, I do not agree with some of the comments of Anonymous, I appreciate his/her involvement. I removed the tags. (Brownpipol (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Major Reference Inconsistencies

[edit]

Noted some factual error. Article claims 25,000 membership. 2nd reference http://www.breadoflifeusa.org/portal.php?page=docs&docid=27, shows a membership of 15,000. WP:AD

Noted reference inconsistencies. 3rd link does not exist.http://www.apts.edu/ajps/05-2/05-2-WMa.pdf, "Doing Theology in the Philippines" points to missing page. WP:SOURCE

4th reference: http://pewforum.org/surveys/pentecostal/countries/?CountryID=163 only shows that church is neo-pentecostal. Do not see how can this imply church is one of the largest. WP:VERIFY

6th reference link does show relevant content. However, the link goes to Google book search for "touch of glory prayer mountain". Please cite specific pages and use manual of style. WP:VERIFY

7th and 8th links point to video that does not stream. Cannot verify 7th and 8th references: http://www.breadoflifeministriesinternational.org/flash/ennounce.html. Also, this is somewhat self-serving. WP:SELFPUB, WP:SOURCE

9th reference link could not be verified. The link does not have any content and does not support the wikipedia text.

14th reference link, goes to non-english youtube video. WP:NONENG

Content on 16th reference is somewhat preachy. WP:SUBSTANTIATE

Needs a lot of cleanup. Please note that unreferenced facts can be removed. Thanks. (Truthspeaketh (talk) 16:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you Truthspeaketh! I shall add the needed proper citations to this article soon. Thanks! (Peridan (talk) 09:46, 31 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Peridan and Brownpipol, Please use ":" when responding. It makes it easier to follow discussion thread. (Truthspeaketh (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Per Wikipedia Policy, removed unverifiable and biased information. Most of the references are bogus. Please remember to read the guidelines carefully. (Brownpipol (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Would also like to point out that link to #18 is not working. I am a member of Bread of Life and hardly think that it is presently 40,000-strong in Metro Manila alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.208.222 (talk) 22:50, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012 * If the new article states 35,000, how consistent is this now with official reference? Who/what is the source of this 35,000? Actually, CCF also has a pegged number at 30,000 internationally which should be verified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.204.181.179 (talk) 15:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peridan/BrownPipol Chit Chat

[edit]

Anonymous response 2: Greetings Don't count me on the wagon of church people who seem to take this negatively so no need to use sarcasm. Matter of fact, I was in good spirits while making these comments. Not all of us are zealots or are defensive-oriented brownpipol and appreciate you respecting our beliefs. I also appreciate your response and I will not interfere with the task ahead of you not unless I feel you are defeating the purpose with which you set out to do this. I shall not also pursue a Peridan/BrownPipol debate in Latin because I have gone tired of doing this over time and leave it to your sharper judgments I hope. Again, I wish interests of Christians here are protected and I find no wrong it letting the truth out.

At this point, deletion is out of the question. If you can reduce this to a Saddleback model or what have you for us to comment on when done, then good for you. I also have visited wiki articles you cited, simplified but good enough. Again, reference problems there but I don't know how to go around that.

Just another comment: I really don't think 15,000 cuts it. It's too safe and too small a number and that is only based on a BOLM USA website. Did they claim that the whole church numbers that many only? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.164.2 (talk) 16:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! It seems you have a lot of knowledge regarding this article. I invite you to create an account and collaborate with Brownpipol. Thank you! (Truthspeaketh (talk) 20:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Follow-up. 35,000 still remains unattached to a valid reference. That's pretty misleading at this point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.204.228.182 (talk) 12:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous: I don't know the posting rules for talk, but since talk implies something that resembles a conversation, I'd like two cents from another perspective pitched in. So feel free to delete this comment but for the sake of transparency, I wish this could be part of the record. I understand you want to get objective (which leaves much to be desired). But in all the cleaning you have done for the sake of scholarly posting, what amount of fact are you leaving and how much have you edited through your own interpretation? I need not go through the list of fallacies, but to say that these changes will make the article more clean and a factual article compared to the previous versions is quite ambitious.

As you can see the article is flagged for major edits. It is not complete. (Brownpipol (talk) 19:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I'd like to commend you on some things however (and I appreciate people policing in wikipedia because the credibility of a lot of items on this site are simply questionable to flat out wrong and granted the reader base is expanding) . For one, claiming to be one of the most respected churches is a dubious claim. This sounds like advertising and it must have been written by a BOLM member or someone closely attached. Just for the record, I know a lot of them and other chuches as I am a Protestant myself. I have some experience in Christian churches here and the last thing I want this article or any article related to this to become is a manipulated half-truth. That said, claims that require surveying and statistics to be certain of need reference. And for this reason, I suggest the both of you examine other Protestant churches wikipedia posts, particularly from the Philippines. If you plan to make this a project or simply delete it, then in the name of scholarly work might as well clean or delete a number of similar posts from several other churches and organizations.

My friend, you suggestions are appreciated, but your actual participation is more important. In the name of scholarly work, please contribute.(Brownpipol (talk) 18:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Re: unbiased websites. I have visited those said websites and wiki posts of these Christian Churches. I have noted similar fallacies and information without reference. For this I agree that similar wiki posts have to be subjected to similar scrutiny since the both of you have started this, might as well make this your project. Also, how certain are you that they are not biased? We all are. We can only hope to reduce this in writing. Saying an article is not so biased is already a large claim. I question your objectivity in this regard. If you are not sure, then don't stake a claim.

If you want to nitpick on other articles, you are free to do so as an editor. Contribute. (Brownpipol (talk) 18:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Re: church split. I believe this happened, but you need first-hand information on this. It is part of BOLM history and can not be left out. Shall we say that paper was not invented in China because no one wrote about it (and mind you it had no national significance at that time). Definitely not. So do not discredit it if ever it did happen because it matters to the church and Christian movement in the Philippines. So is the controversy section as this too greatly affected the direction of the church as well as its credibility. It does not matter whether it be positive or negative. That is irrelevant to the truth. It must be known if possible which churches and personalities have moved on as a result from this split if you are to cite examples. But this issue is a footnote issue.

Before you cite the History of paper in China, please take some time to do some research. Yes, someone wrote about it. There are verifiable sources. (Brownpipol (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
"It is irrelevant to the truth." What truth are you talking about? To remove relevant facts is to revise history. Facts should be stated plainly. How you see it as "truth" or not is irrelevant in Wikipedia. If you want to write about your "truth", use a blog. (Brownpipol (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Re: number of members. I think a rough estimation would help but even that needs referencing. I highly doubt that there are just 15,000 members. The central church building alone packs 10,000 according to sources and simple mathematics. Again, a lot is put to question.

This might sound demeaning, but I would like to illustrate why relevant, verifiable references are important. A source tells me, 24 Hour Church of Elvis has a building that packs 90,000 people. Using simple mathematics, they have 120,000 members. Are you referring to the same source as the Church of Elvis? Oh yeah, my source says that Elvis is alive. (Brownpipol (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Other than these, let's be fair and sensitive to truth. Writing about churches, particularly those we hear and read a lot about are tricky matters. If not altogether deleting this article will help protect BOLM and other Philippine churches from the abuse of authorship and censorship handed down by amateurs who know nothing close to having a clue about what goes on in Christian life in the Philippines. Let's not pretend to be disinterested and at the same time academic. Thank you and more power to your work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.164.2 (talk) 02:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Your opinion and concerns are duly noted. This article came to my attention when it was flagged for deletion. I highly encourage you to edit and make bold changes to the other articles you believe need to be revised. Moreover, I think we should remember here that Wikipedia is not a public forum for complaining, nor is it a bulletin board; it is an encyclopedia. As such, we can only report the facts and let the reader draw the conclusions. We are all editors, not policemen. Everyone has the freedom to revise and remove information within the parameters of the Wikipedia guidelines. If you look into the talk pages of Saddleback Church and other well known churches, you will see that editing is a long process of deleting and rewriting. This article as well as many others is a work in progress. I invite you to make Wikipedia better. Thank you. (Truthspeaketh (talk) 13:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Man, I must have touched a raw nerve in these church people types. I am making my honest to goodness edits as politely and cordial as possible. (Brownpipol (talk) 18:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Brownpipol,

I think what you want to be added here implies the discreditation of this denomination. This is not a mere ad hominem attack. What makes the 'church split' relevant to this article? Did the issue make it in a national scale? No publication, no newspaper... nothing documented such an incident, because the incident, if it ever happened, is not relevant. May the consensus have its way.

I shall delete the recently added 'church split' issue because no citations can be given.

(Peridan (talk) 18:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Peridan,

With regards to "church wars", Non sequitur[2]. Your arguments are irrelevant to the purpose of making this article free from bias. In fact, the arguments are [ad hominem] and may be grounds for blocking, as a personal attack[3].

I am simply showing a conflict of interest since the tone of the article is very biased.

(Brownpipol (talk) 00:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)) --[reply]

Brownpipol,

Surely you can't base all your accusations on me just because I singularly edit this article. I mean, c'mon. A million accusations can be put on me simply because of the fact that I edit this article solely. If you look at my history also, this is not the only wiki I edited. I was also involved in editing Protestantism in the Philippines and others.

In fact, by adding the controversy section alone proves that I don't belong to this church in any way. And even if I did, that doesn't diminish the fact that all I want is truth and truth alone, that is why the added Controversy section was written by me and supported by my added valid citations. Look at the history of this article and you'd see that someone (obviously from BOLM) deleted that part and I undid that move.

If the 'church split' did happen, I believe that you want to put it here to accomplish your hidden agenda of attacking/discrediting this church. Wikipedia is not an avenue for such matters. I deem your attacks inappropriate, considering that you're from another Evangelical church.

Why did I say 'attacks'? Obviously you were involved in that supposedly church split because you know the names of those who were allegedly involved in the hullabaloo. The sites you just cited did not mention any name of BOLM at all.

I don't like church wars because it is shallow and too petty for my taste.

And 'church wars' are not at all relevant to this article. All the citations here come from valid sources and publications (meaning newspapers like Philippine Daily Inquirer, Philippine Star, Manila Bulletin). One cannot simply add a site or blog as citation especially if that one is a church that claims to have split from BOLM. It's a blatant bias.

I mean, what does anyone care if BOLM had a split in 1996 or not? Did that make any impact in a national scale? The Controversy issue of Faye San Juan did and made tremendous impact in the Philippine media in 2004, but not this 'church split'.

So please forgive me for saying this but stop using this to attack this church. It's very unbecoming of you as a member of another church.

(Peridan (talk) 02:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Peridan,

I find it hard to believe that you are not a member or a current/former staff member of bread of life. I looked at your user contributions ((http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&contribs=user&target=Peridan)) and ALL of your edits are related to bread of life. Even your edits for Chelsea Bernasconi, you added the cross link to the Bread of Life Ministries wiki.

If you truly own that picture that you posted on Wikipedia Commons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:4202778522917l.jpg, it means that you are also Crossroad77 on friendster, which is affiliated with the church. Your picture is exactly the same as the profile picture for Crossroad77 in Friendster. See http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/801/breadoflifepicture.jpg


Also, Please undo your deletion of the 1996 split. If you need proof that Bread of Life indeed split in 1996. Check out the about us, history page of http://guidinglightbaguio.com/. This is a church pastored by Robbie Casas former Bread of Life Pastor in Baguio. Another church that came from Bread of Life is Living Word Cebu, with Pastor Mel Caparros. Check out http://www.livingwordcm.com/aboutus.php. I got this info from former church members. Plus, some of them even have preaching tapes that explicitly mention the split in 1996. Let the truth prevail.

(Brownpipol (talk) 01:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

-- My deletion of the controversy was indeed wrong and I ask wiki admin's forgiveness for this matter. I was new then to this editorial consensus, but as you can see, I reposted the controversy article and revised the whole article to render it unbiased.

I assure you that I'm not in any way a member of this church. I just know that this church has lots of people who disagree with it. I only call for clemency, civility and truth. If people get paid to revise this article for Bread of Life, I assure you that I won't be the only one defending the existence of this article.

One must take note however of how it was also revised by some people of this church, like having terms such as "Lord", etc. If you review the article's history, I didn't do it. I assume that it may have been revised by a member, who don't have an account here in wiki.

Please do review my revisions of the article if it is still biased.

Your question to my objectivity is noted, and I apologize for this. May the consensus have its way. Thank you.

(Peridan (talk) 1:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC))

I can't help but comment on Peridan's decision to delete the controversy. Why did you delete the controversy and not edit it? I find it a very convenient excuse to remove any negative publicity on the church. Are you a member of the church? Are you being paid by the church to remove such comments?

I question your objectivity.

(Truthspeaketh (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Brownpipol,

For the following noted critique:

a. "it is one of the most respected and largest" because it was cited in a paper "Doing Theology in the Philippines" made by Asia Pacific Theological Seminary. Pdf copy is cited below this article.

b) Please search for the article Presbyterianism and you'll see that Myung Sung Presbyterian Church claims to be the largest presbyterian church, given that on their website they have 25,000 people per service. The phrase one of the "largest" connotes that BOL is a megachurch, by definition of megachurch, having a population of more than 2,000. Each service in Bread of Life has 2,500 in population... counting the central churches of this denomination, at Onstage Greenbelt, Crossroad 77 Auditorium, and Glorietta 4. The Crossroad 77 gathering meets in Crossroad 77 auditorium which has 2,100 seating capacity. All necessary citings are below the Bread of Life wiki article.

e.) 1. No article can be cited on the church split that supposedly happened inside the church, that is why it needs to be deleted.

2. Agreed, the controversy was deleted, but if you review the previous versions, it was originally put there, but necessary facts like how the former Bread of Life pastor Rev. Bong Saquing was disciplined (he wrote the article in "Kingdom of a Higher World" not "Living in the Highest") was also included here. Several unknown people would delete this tidbit fact and just state that the church had controversy implying that no effort was done to fix it. That is why, I deleted it altogether so people won't twist the stated fact.

All other noted biases shall be changed accordingly.

(Peridan (talk) 12:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Peridan,

Thank you for agreeing that the article is NOT neutral. Some points:

a) Can you cite proof that "it is one of the most respected and largest" Evangelical Bible churches? How do you qualify respect? By definition, "most respected" is an opinion.

b) In terms of being one of the largest, do you have any comparative independently verified data? Even Myungsung Presbyterian Church needs to cite the facts when it claimed to be the largest.

c) Also, why are you asking other articles to be "scrutinized"? The other articles will be reviewed separately.

d) Just to make it clear... If you look at Baptist_Bible_Fellowship and Christ's Commission Fellowship, these articles are not biased. Wikipedia is not a pulpit or a marketing brochure.

e) Why did you delete the fact that this church published a controversial hoax article? This is verified independently. According to the SunStar Newspaper, it just made email hoax of the year 2004. http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/ceb/2004/11/14/oped/nini.b..cabaero.html See http://www.manilamail.com/archive/nov2004/04nov07.htm

I also noticed that several "negative" but factual comments have been removed:

1. In 1996, the church split. Rev. Conde was placed on disciplinary sabbatical. Most of the pastors from the provinces left.

2. In 2004, the church published a Living in the Highest Article. The Philippine Star, Inquirer, etc. showed that it is a hoax.

To summarize, state facts. No bias. Please review the guidelines.

(Brownpipol (talk) 21:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]


--- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownpipol (talk • contribs) 16:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC) The article did not state that it is THE largest church in the country. It just stated that it is "one of the most respected" and (one of the) largest Evangelical Bible-Believing churches in the Philippines. Construction of sentences should be noted by the previous editors. Review your grammar.[reply]

Everything else that the previous editors have noted as not neutral is true. It isn't, but not the phrase "Not only should a Christian be concerned with heaven's promise, but also the welfare of his country, shining his light in these dire times of the Philippines." If you see the whole context of the paragraph, it implies that THAT is the view of the church. It doesn't assume that it should be the pervading view of the Evangelical world.

I will revise almost all the noted bias statements within the article, except those that I contested.

Please do note that other Filipino evangelical churches that have wiki articles should get the same scrutiny as this article. See Protestantism in the Philippines —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peridan (talk • contribs) 08:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History of Prior Deletions

[edit]

This article has been deleted two times already: 

    * 02:01, 21 November 2007 Jreferee (Talk | contribs) deleted "Bread of Life Ministries International"
      (CSD G12 Blatant copyright infringement of http://www.breadoflifeministriesinternational.org/aboutus.html)
    * 13:33, 29 August 2007 RHaworth (Talk | contribs) deleted "Bread of Life Ministries International" ‎
      (Spam / nn-group / soapbox / etc. Already speedily deletd at Bread of life ministries international. 
      Content was: 'BREAD OF LIFE MINISTRIES INTERNATIONALBread of Life Ministries International 
      is a corporate and legal entity so organized to look after)
    * 22:24, 08 March 2009 Not Neutral Point of View

--Triwbe (talk) 14:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier deletions were for blatant copyright violations. No evidence of that here.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 03:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The writing style and words used in the article is not from a neutral point of view. As a whole, the whole article seems to be taken from a marketing brochure of the church. Some clear examples of bias:

For example, it states that Bread of Life is "considered one of the most respected and largest Evangelical Bible-believing churches in the Philippines". Most respected by whom?

It states that it is the largest Evangelical church in the Philippines. No facts were given to show this is true.

The church "experienced significant growth, riding the wave of renewed enthusiasm for faith and spiritual relationship in the Philippines." What do you mean by renewed enthusiasm for faith? "Spiritual relationship in the Philippines" - This does not make any sense.

The church "believes in the Gideon principle of making significant changes despite being few in number for the Lord"

The whole section of God and Country is not neutral. For example, "Not only should a Christian be concerned with heaven's promise, but also the welfare of his country, shining his light in these dire times of the Philippines." is not neutral.

Most of the references in the article are self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves. Moreover, crossroad77 seems to be a privately owned entity, as a "Lifestyle, Fitness and events management services" company. Bread of Life seems to be a quasi-non for profit organization.

--Brownpipol recommendation for speedy deletion for the following reasons: 1. Blatant advertising - the tone of the article is very similar to the marketing material of the church. See History, Prayer Activities and Other Ministries.


2. Recreation of deleted material and use of copyrighted material.

The history section is almost a copy of what is written in the aboutus section at http://www.breadoflifeministriesinternational.org/aboutus.html . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownpipol (talk • contribs) 00:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to AfD. This is not qualified for CSD. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 13:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Not only should a Christian be concerned with heaven's promise, but also the welfare of his country, shining his light in these dire times of the Philippines." --- How is that not neutral? Sounds like a mission-vision statement to me. Just needs proper referencing. Let's not be academic for the sake of being academic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.208.222 (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy controversy

[edit]

Enough with the edit warring. Could the next editor to add or remove the Controversy section please explain their edit here? —C.Fred (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fred,
Thanks for responding. I do not mean to cause any trouble. Unfortunately, the controversy section is upsetting some people, enough to removing the whole section without any explanation. I am open to discussion... and even tried to ask others to post their take on the section.
For me, why is it important? As a member of BOLM, it serves as an important reminder (a learning experience). Organizations are composed of people who make mistakes. Although this created a big buzz among the the Philippine media (TV, Radio, Newspapers and blogs), organizations can recover. It is only when facing the truth when one can truly improve. I do not want to sanitize or whitewash what truly happened in 2004.
I would like to request for your assistance on preventing vandals to remove the section.
Thanks in advance. (Brownpipol (talk) 21:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]
I decided to update the article with more context. I think the old version did not properly explain how the story unraveled. Feel free to comment. Thanks! (Bicolexpress (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Good day everyone! Just noticed the heat in the editing of this article but appreciate that for the most part, the article is indeed solid. I am a Bread of Life member, not a staff member or a ministry head. I consider myself fairly an old-timer in Bread of Life. And the sole reason I am hopping in is to preserve the integrity of the church. For the record, I am not against the Controversy Section, I welcome it. I do not see it as mud-slinging or earlier accusations of church-wars. The truth is the truth. As bicol said, it is a reminder. I include the church split in this discussion. This already household knowledge to us old-timers. Why hide it? It is not more about "Why include it?" as it is much about "Why not?" This is a fact. BOLM is not perfect and up to present has its shares of struggles.

Bicol, are you a member of BOLM? Same goes to you Sir Fred? Would like to collaborate with what I know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avillagracia (talk • contribs) 10:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Members

[edit]

I edited and deleted some of the notable members because some are not/former members thus they are not part of BOL.

Names deleted:

Kuh Ledesma - I don't know where this came from maybe she was a former member but I was shocked to see her name in this list.

  • I know for a fact that she isn't. She is in CCF. (And I am connected with both churches.)

Sunshine Cruz - She and her husband were former members of BOL and I've heard that they're now in Christ's Commission Fellowship.

  • same here

Washington Sycip - He was just invited to speak in a conference that HistoryKo(A BOL events coordinator) hosted thus he is not a BOL member whatsoever.

  • true

F. Sionil - Same as Washington Sycip. He was just invited to speak in a conference that HistoryKo coordinated. So again, he has nothing to do with BOL

  • true

-From a Bread of Life member — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.200.228.82 (talk) 12:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for that information, you're welcome to update both Bread of Life and CCF article. ElmersGlue2011 (talk) 13:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:C77convenarium.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:C77convenarium.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files missing permission as of 29 November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns about Vandalism

[edit]

Good day! This user 94.202.226.183 has vandalized the article twice. Please monitor about this user to prevent vandalism and being bias-toned words among churches. Thank you --ElmersGlue2011 (talk) 15:30, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good day as well!Now that you've mentioned it, why not look at the whole article as of date? I noticed major revisions with citations leading to nowhere, let alone grammatical errors. Is a BOLM member deliberately editing this without consultation? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.54.60 (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

praise God we are very greatful to let you know that we are in uganda thanking you for the work of god you are doing Go

  1. REDIRECT Target page name

d BLESS YOU.196.0.53.162 (talk) 10:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 26 external links on Bread of Life Ministries International. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:00, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Bread of Life Ministries International. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bread_of_Life_Ministries_International&oldid=1200337125"