Talk:Sayings of Jesus on the cross

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity / Jesus (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Jesus work group (marked as Mid-importance).

Hello, I am the IP editor - you could call me A.J.K.[edit]

Thank you for your concern,

When are direct references to the Bible not considered original research? Is this not considered to be a primary source?

All the best, Andrew

Thanks again, I appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 18:02, 6 October 2010‎


I added a little something to the section about "Father, forgive them for they do not know what we do."

Jesus having the power to summon a legion of angels is never mentioned in the Bible. Nor is the greatest collected evil of mankind being present at his crucifixion. I mean c'mon, the people crucifying Jesus weren't evil, just misguided. Which ironically is the meaning of the saying.

Clearly, this page has been corrupted by unintelligent evangelical Christians. Don't get me wrong: I'm a Christian and have no intention of besmirching Jesus' name, but damn it, those wackos are the Christian equivalent of militant Muslims. All they do is give Christianity a bad name.

Please, I implore you to add citations to the claim of Jesus having the power to summon a legion of angels (at least before his death). A LEGITIMATE citation, not some made-up rant from a deluded preacher.

Regards, A proud and open-minded Christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:31, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Anon Editor - I just reverted your changes. If you'd like to edit the sentence so it reads more factual and/or correct, please feel free to do so. However, inserting your POV into in-line comments is NOT the way to do it as it only makes the page that much worse.
Also please keep your comments on Talk discussions to ONLY matters of improving the page and do so in a civil manner. Denigrating previous editors as "unintelligent evangelical Christians" and "deluded preachers" is also NOT the way Talk works.
All that being said, I do not disagree with your point. In fact, I'll go ahead and look at the section and tag/delete the most glaring issues of OR/non-NPOV. If you would like to discuss further ways to constructively improve the page, please feel free to reply on this thread or send me a note on my Talk page. In the meantime, I would suggest you reference Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and Wikipedia:Civility for how Wiki works. Yours - Ckruschke (talk) 16:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke
Follow-up - it appears that the seemingly POV comments in each of the sections are direction quotes from Adam Hamilton's book "24 Hrs That Changed The World". I've added ref's to state that in each section. Not sure this is the way to go, but this is how whoever wrote these sections did it. I'll let others debate (if/as necessary) the page giving such specific credence to the thoughts of one book/author. Ckruschke (talk) 17:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke
I'll raise the issue: What purpose is served by the extended quotes from "Pastor Hamilton"? If there are debates regarding the significance of these words, then other views should be represented. If there are no such debates, then using these words directly seems more like a kind of Christian meditation rather than an encyclopedic statement of fact. 2001:7E8:C296:B101:2085:867A:3CF8:9599 (talk) 06:38, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
I have tidied up the quotes from Adam Hamilton (pastor), but do not see their valid purpose for inclusion in this article. ----Design (talk) 01:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

"He'lel, he'lel, lamah zabac to ni..." ... Lemuria?[edit]

Considering that this site even bothers to have an article for both Lemuria and Mu, I'm surprised that none of the theories of James Churchward or anyone else of the sort are even so much as hinted at. May someone fix this problem, if they can? Thanks. (talk) 20:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you provide reliable sources that discuss these theories? I'd assume the theory that Jesus' sayings were in some unknown language from a continent that science has failed to find any significant evidence of would be considered a fringe theory and would be unfit for this article. Huon (talk) 22:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Remove Adam Hamilton quotes, add citation[edit]

Currently this article contains three quotations from US Methodist minister Adam Hamilton (pastor). I suggest that these quotes be removed, and a citation to Hamilton's 2009 book 24 hours that changed the world be added at the end of the section headed Interpretations. An encyclopaedia article should not give credence to any single interpretation. If you have any comments please discuss on this talk page.----Design (talk) 01:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

"All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic."----Design (talk) 07:44, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for raising this valid point. While encyclopaedia article should not give credence to any single interpretation, I think it helpful to include general or typical interpretations. If there are significantly different views, our reporting should point that out and state them. Let's guard against any over-reaction, please. Afaprof01 (talk) 17:48, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
My view is this matter is that quoting Hamilton here is disproportionately favoring his view. I have no particular disagreement with his commentary or interpretation, but there are many authors who could be quoted. The article could expand briefly on varying interpretations, or simply cite his book as desribed in my first par.----Design (talk) 08:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
A good catch, Design. Afaprof01 (talk) 06:19, 3 May 2015 (UTC)