Talk:The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Tone needs work
The tone of this article, especially the Meng-tse part of the "Questionable Accuracy" section, is much too informal. For example, Wikipedia should not be saying that it's "theoretically possible" that Meng-tse was reincarnated 300 years later -- try something more like "Some have raised the counterargument that Meng-tse might have been reincarnated..." or something. In other words, to make this article read more like an encyclopedia article, try revising it with a neutral point of view and formal tone. --Elysdir 02:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Jossi did some work on this article a couple days ago, but then removed two big sections of it. Although those sections had significant tone problems, I felt that they were very important to the article; they were among the main things that I originally came to the article hoping to find out about. So I restored them, but also heavily revised them to improve the tone. While I was there, I rewrote most of the introductory material, fixing grammar and spelling and broken links.
The article definitely needs some citations for its claims, but I know the accuracy-dispute stuff is true, having read several web pages about that dispute before finding my way here in the first place. I would cite those pages, but (a) I don't have the pages in question handy, and (b) I don't know whether those particular pages are really reliable sources. So I left it with the citation-needed template in hopes that someone will add citations at some point. --Elysdir 06:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
¶ This article originally neglected Edgar Goodspeed's Modern Apocrypha, which devoted a short chapter to the Aquarian Gospel. I have inserted a reference and moved one of the points made by Goodspeed that had been attributed to a much later author. Sussmanbern (talk) 01:06, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
The article says: "The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ (full title: The Aquarian Age Gospel of Jesus, the Christ of the Piscean Age)". I don't think the formatting of the "full title" is right: it is not in italics, it is not enclosed in quote marks, and it contains wikilinks. Obviously these wikilinks should be included in the article, but I don't think their correct place is in the full title of the book. I think we can enhance the readability of the article by making the full title conform to the typographical conventions for titles (italics, quotes, or both) and putting the wikilinks elsewhere. NerdyNSK (talk) 19:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Groups or churches that use it?
Are there any? I stumbled across this: "'Neverdes' have numerous followers" by Wayne Slater, AP: Charleston W. Ca. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=v8gaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=I0cEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5474,2912576&dq=aquarian-gospel&hl=en Шизомби (Sz) (talk) 07:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- There must be some academic works that deal with various preachers such as Dowling and following New Age people. Those would be reliable sources, unlike a brief mention in a 1973 local newspaper article. The article needs valid sources as well as difference in tone.--Parkwells (talk) 21:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Am I the only one that finds this particularly troubling?
CHAPTER 109:6 They do not seem to know that every thought and wish is photographed and then preserved within the Book of Life to be revealed at any time the masters will.
Are we expected to believe that a 1st century Palestinian used this terminology and that anyone had the slightest idea what he was talking about? What contemporary 1st century word would have been equivalent and what would it be referring to? John Elson★3Dham★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 05:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
The King James Version of the Bible and some modern translations/versions use the wording in The Revelation 5:1 of the "book", yet there were no 'books' in c. 70 AD. Other Bible versions use "scroll". Does the historically inaccurate use of "book" cause anyone to "find this particularly troubling?" "Photographed and then preserved within" should be replaced with "recorded within". What's needed is a revised version of The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ to correct its few mistakes. - Brad Watson, Miami 18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
There are 18 years of Jesus' life missing from the Bible (ages 12-30)
I added the following which is the main point of the book: *There are 18 years of Jesus' life missing in the Bible (ages 12-30). The Aquarian Gospel documents these 18 years as a time when Jesus travels to the centers of wisdom in India, Tibet & Western India, Persia, Assyria, Greece, and Egypt. In each of these capital cities, he is educated, tested, and teaches the religious leaders. Jesus inevitably proves that he is 'God's chosen one' (the Christ) in these locales and brings back this multi-cultural wisdom and confidence to Galilee and Judea. - Brad Watson, Miami 22.214.171.124 (talk) 11:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Age of Aquarius begins December 21, 2012
December 21, 2012 is a major cosmic alignment that occurs once every 26,000 years. It is NOT the end of the Mayan Calendar, end of the world, or end of time. But 12/21/12 is the end of the Age of Pisces and the beginning of the Age of Aquarius. I, therefore, added (12/21/12). - Brad Watson, Miami 126.96.36.199 (talk) 11:56, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Link needs updating
In the external links section, the link " Introducing the Aquarian Gospel, Swami Nirmalananda Giri" needs to be revised to point to the new URL for the article, which is: http://www.ocoy.org/original-christianity/the-aquarian-gospel/
One of the "difficulties" mentioned in this article is:
- "Dowling claimed that Jesus knew Meng-tse of Lhasa, Tibet but Meng-tse lived 300 years before Jesus’ time."
Gospel of James
The article lists as one of the problems of the book (as stated by Edgar J. Goodspeed) that it borrows some details from the Gospel of James, "a work that may not be older than the fifth century". Does that dating come from Goodspeed himself? Because it directly contradicts the article Gospel of James, which dates the gospel to the second century, says that it was mentioned by Origen in the third century, and a copy of it dating to the fourth century exists. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC)