Talk:Cooperative Baptist Fellowship

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Baptist work group.

First section[edit]

This is an important Baptist quasi-denomination. It has taken and continues to take monumental stands again the increasing crass fundamentalism in the Southern Baptist Convention, at least at the top. The CBF is doing much to allow women to fulfill their call to Christian ministry, including pastor. CME GBM 14:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. CBF is becoming more relevant in the world, especially as the SBC has decided to seperate themselves from other Christian groups. It has gained notice from former Presidents Clinton and Carter, as well as internationally. Jpm78 16:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is NOT neutral. It refers to issues as accepted fact, instead of "CBF believes" or "CBF states". It refers to CBF mission as "biblically based", when that is their opinion,. and that opinion would be disputed by others - including non-Christians. It says the SBC "began" dealing with social issues after the conservative takeover/resurgence; the SBC was dealing with social issues long before the takeover - they simply issued more conservative statements after the takeover. Grammer and phrases do matter when trying to keep an article neutral. And there is no comment on the hardhitting issues facing the CBF, but I chose to stick to the basics in my edit. --Baxterguy 18:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bias in this article saddens me. This is a sometimes veiled, sometimes explicit apologetic for the CBF. In that way it does no one any good. It hurts Wikipedia's reputation and I think will backfire on the CBF, at least for critical thinkers. As a detail, I would hope the authors would provide a reference for the statement: "The New Testament is acknowledged as providing two views of the role of women—a literal approach of submission to men or an inclusive approach." Who exactly acknowledges that? The statement sounds designed to serve the interests of the CBF. It contrasts "literal" and "inclusive" in a way that seems illogical to me. After reading the CBF website, I believe there may be factual errors in the article. That is frightening. Decisiondoctor (talk) 03:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Word Replacement to Improve Understanding[edit]

In the section "Beliefs", first paragraph, in the sentence, "CBF also ascribes to the "Four Fragile Freedoms" . . . ", should "ascribes" be replaced by "subscribes" ? Darkman101 (talk) 23:47, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]