Talk:Book of Jeremiah
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
יִרְמְיָהוּ Yirməyāhū - the "yahu"part refers to God...(For example, http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Netanyahu.html states that Netanyahu is derived from "Gift of God")
Is it not relevant here that "Jeremiah" has become a byword for a pessimist? --DominicSayers 07:48, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
"Both versions are heavily edited and reflect the perspectives of later ages" - this appears prejudicial at least from the standpoint that there are alternative views and explanations for the differences. Since the majority of the Book of Jeremiah is preserved with about 15-17% variance in content (not order of content), to say the book is heavily edited can be misunderstood. It would be better to explain what is meant by heavily edited, and give at least a paragraph or two on why that paradigm is better than the concept that contents have been preserved. JohnRajendra (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
The current contents section says that Jeremiah is arranged in 5 subsections, or "books". However, the division it describes scatters its "books" among the chapters. clearly doesn't reflect the book's actual organization, but rather, some commentator's views of how to categorize the contents. Could the commentatot's views be sourced, pleased? Otherwise this appears to be original research.
The Prophet Jeremiah
The beginning of the section on "The Prophet Jeremiah" begins with this text: "The Prophet Jeremiah is the book that describes was a son of a priest from Anatot in the land of Benjamin, who lived in the last years of the Kingdom of Judah [...]"
There's obviously something wrong with this; it's not even a grammatical sentence. Meaningwise, too, I assume it should say that the Prophet Jeremiah was/is said to have been a person, not a book. I'm not sure how best to fix it though. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- "According to" is adequate attribution. WP:NPOV prohibits taking a position on which points of view editors believe are correct, so once viewpoints are appropriately attributed deprecatory statements like "said to" shouldn't be used. Otherwise we'd have to say "said to" for everything. If you think the statement can be simplified, change it. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 14:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)