|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Translation of Numbers 3
Considering this is an article about a Jewish practice, I cannot understand why the verse in Numbers 3 is translated here using the King James Bible. I don't doubt the accuracy of this translation, but it would seem more appropriate to use and cite a Jewish translation of the Tanacht. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Reason in Lede
- Hi! There is great disagreement as to "why" the ceremony was/is performed. These differences are discussed in part in the sections on "Traditional Interpretation" and "Biblical Criticism Perspectives." Because the issue is complex and Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy precludes taking an unbalanced position, the matter is defered to where it can be discussed in detail. Best, --Shirahadasha 16:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Biblical criticism perspectives
Currently this section is sourced only to "Peake's Commentary". Would it be possible to provide complete citations including an edition, ISBN number, and page numbers? The content currently says things which appear to be contradictory. One paragraph says that "the Jahwist's text argues that the male firstborn were to be sacrificed in commemoration of the event, and thus firstborn human males had to be redeemed from this fate", while another paragraph says that this argument is one being made by contemporary scholars, rather than the text itself. I'm not aware of any Bible text that makes the first argument directly. Would it be possible for someone with access to Peake's to verify this issue and provide more complete citations? Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 04:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Reading this article I'm a little confused. Is this a ceremony to excuse someone from priestly duties, or just performed by priests. Some clarification is required. If it's both, then what actually are the duties they'd have to do otherwise. This should all be in the lead paragraph.–OrangeDog (talk • edits) 17:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Neither. The father redeems the boy from the Kohen. There is no alternative; if the father doesn't do it, then when the boy grows up he must do it himself. -- Zsero (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Move back to English title?
- (cur | prev) 13:19, 9 June 2006 Karimarie (talk | contribs) (26 bytes) (moved Redemption of First-born to Pidyon HaBen: Pidyon HaBen is the proper name for the ceremony and all other Jewish lifecycle events use the Hebrew name for their article rather than an English name. If anyone has a problem with this move, feel)
- I don't see a problem with the move. Additionally "Redemption of First-born" redirects to this article, so that base is covered. I think what the editor meant by "all other Jewish lifecycle events" were those that were specific to Jewish life (but I could be wrong). Even though 'bar mitzvah' (which you point out) is Aramaic (in origin), it is now also the Hebrew term for it ('ben mitzvah' would be the wholly Hebrew version, but it isn't really used), so — by technicality — he was also correct on that part. — al-Shimoni (talk) 21:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks al-Shimoni.
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR results:
- And, not directly relevant to WP:EN but out of curiosity:
- leviticus OR israel OR priest OR levites OR bible "redemption of the first born" 342 results
What is a first-born son?
Is a "first-born son" a son who is also the eldest child? Or is it the eldest son? I think the article should have a definition, somewhere near the top. I read the whole thing and was still confused on this question. It says something about how the ceremony is not performed if the eldest child is female, which would suggest the first interpretation; but it also says that the ceremony is performed because traditionally "the duties of a priest fell upon the eldest son of each family", which suggests the second. Thanks. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 05:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)