Talk:Divine inspiration

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Untitled

Divine Inspiration is also a pop group http://www.discogs.com/artist/Divine+Inspiration

None seem to fit

I was wanting to wikilink the phrase "divine inspiration" from the following context (a sourced sentence from the Jehovah's Witnesses article), but none of the current options on this disambiguation page seemed to fit.

"However, the Governing Body [of the Jehovah's Witnesses] makes no claim of infallibility or divine inspiration."

It can't link to revelation, because that would conflict with a previous (sourced and wikilinked) statement.

"Watch Tower publications claim that doctrinal changes and refinements result from a process of progressive revelation, in which God gradually reveals his will and purpose."

Any suggestions? Does this merit another article, or a change in wording? For now, I'm settling with wikilinking infallibility to Infallibility of the Church. ...but what do you think? ~B F^izz _(talk) 06:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have de-disambiguated the article to make it fit generically. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:13, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Personal Examples

I wanted to add a personal example to enrich the readers understanding of divine inspiration. My addition was as follows:

"* Christian: Some divine inspiration arrives in personal ways designed especially for that person's life. See this example."

It was subsequently removed. Here is my response:

Censoring information before people have a chance to judge it for themselves appears to be against the spirit of open discussion and freedom of speech. Removing information that is against your point of view and deciding for everybody else what they should read and what they shouldn't is only manipulating people to your point of view. If something adds to the topic or discussion at hand, then it should be readily available for anyone to decide for themselves whether the information is relevant or if they choose to believe it or not. Denying people that opportunity is against the spirit of Wikipedia and open discussion and freedom of point of view. Censoring information that is pertinent and relevant to the topic serves no other purpose than to hand control of one topic over to one editor in their own little fiefdom!

Ironically, I was inspired to add my post to this page by God in the middle of the night. I have therefore only done what God required me to do! If you choose to remove it, that is on you and your decision. "It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" - Acts 26:14.

God Bless.

121.75.83.195 (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]