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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects 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.
It doesn't say, but I suppose this is all about Wicca or something, don't you suppose.... Is this our idea of neutral tone, "God's Word" being a euphemism for the Bible, and all that? --Wetman 08:56, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
Oh, but I do like the I-know-Latin-not-like-you-dolt Latin title. It just gives that churchly tone we all admire. --Wetman 08:58, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
God's Word is a very traditional way of referring to the Bible - while pointing out the reason the Bible is so important. Lectio Divina is a traditional Benedictine way of praying that's becoming a lot more common, especially among Catholics.126.96.36.199 01:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Hebrews 11:6 provides the foundation for lectio divina. First, we must believe that God exists, the God of the Bible as He has revealed Himself there in the Old and New Testaments, and it is there that we read (lectio) about Him. After reading about Him, we press deeper into the knowledge of God in Scripture through meditation (meditatio), encircling what we've read with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, thereby drawing strength from the sap of its truth. Lectio and meditatio on the existence, attributes, activities, and personhood of God lead us naturally to the second part of Hebrews 11:6 which is believing that God rewards those who diligently seek Him. Oratio is a conversation arising from the hearts of those desiring to diligently seek God. This in turn flows into Contemplatio where we bask in the presence of the God whom we have diligently sought in His own revelation of Himself.
This is among the best wikipedia articles I've ever read. Esay to understand, no useless information, and excellent links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
This page gets over 6,000 hits a month. How many references does it have as of now? Zero. Amazing. The page looks well written, however. To those with claim to authorship here: could you please add references? I can try to add references, but that will mean modifying the text since I do not know where all the text came from. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 12:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Over a year later, it is fixed/rewriten now. Some of the text had copyvio problems, so was replaced and rewritten. History2007 (talk) 00:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)