Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:41, 21 August 2023

	Jesus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 25, 2013.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 17, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted June 2, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 3, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted November 2, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted May 3, 2005 Articles for deletion Kept October 6, 2005 Peer review Reviewed December 15, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 14, 2006 Peer review Reviewed November 27, 2006 Peer review Reviewed April 21, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 21, 2007 WikiProject A-class review Approved July 12, 2009 Good article reassessment Delisted May 5, 2013 Good article nominee Listed May 28, 2013 Guild of Copy Editors Copyedited August 15, 2013 Featured article candidate Promoted Current status: Featured article

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Jesus. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Jesus at the Reference desk.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Template:Vital article Biography: Core This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is listed on the project's core biographies page. Religion Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Christianity: Jesus / Theology / Catholicism / Eastern O. / Oriental O. / Jewish / Anglicanism / Latter Day Saints Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  This article is within the scope of the Jesus work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive. This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Jewish Christianity (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (assessed as Top-importance). Template:WP1.0 Bahá'í Faith High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bahá'í Faith, a coordinated attempt to increase the quality and quantity of information about the Baháʼí Faith on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Misplaced Pages visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.Bahá'í FaithWikipedia:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithTemplate:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithBahá'í Faith High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Misplaced Pages's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Greece: Byzantine High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Byzantine world task force. Islam Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Judaism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Ancient Near East Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. Section sizes Section size for Jesus (52 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 17,703 17,703 Name 1,746 3,808 Jesus Christ 2,062 2,062 Life and teachings in the New Testament 156 82,045 Canonical gospels 2,990 13,860 Authorship, date, and reliability 4,772 4,772 Comparative structure and content 6,098 6,098 Genealogy and nativity 8,424 8,424 Early life, family, and profession 5,870 5,870 Baptism and temptation 4,155 4,155 Public ministry 4,140 23,197 Disciples and followers 2,488 2,488 Teachings and miracles 13,392 13,392 Proclamation as Christ and Transfiguration 3,177 3,177 Passion Week 356 20,850 Activities in Jerusalem 4,413 4,413 Last Supper 4,447 4,447 Agony in the Garden, betrayal, and arrest 2,053 2,053 Trials by the Sanhedrin, Herod, and Pilate 6,155 6,155 Crucifixion and entombment 3,426 3,426 Resurrection and ascension 5,533 5,533 Early Christianity 5,377 5,377 Historical views 3,723 61,110 Judea and Galilee in the 1st century 4,526 4,526 Sources 8,396 8,396 Chronology 7,219 7,219 Historicity of events 1,248 21,654 Family 8,389 8,389 Baptism 1,367 1,367 Ministry in Galilee 4,883 4,883 Role 2,298 2,298 Passover and crucifixion in Jerusalem 2,663 2,663 After crucifixion 806 806 Portraits of Jesus 3,384 3,384 Language, ethnicity, and appearance 8,611 8,611 Christ myth theory 3,597 3,597 Religious perspectives 3,611 47,737 Christianity 7,324 7,324 Judaism's view 6,428 6,428 Manichaeism 2,098 2,098 Islam 14,158 14,603 Ahmadiyya 445 445 Druze 2,007 2,007 Baháʼí Faith 4,186 4,186 Other 7,480 7,480 Artistic depictions 8,016 8,016 Associated relics 5,790 5,790 See also 650 650 Notes 42 42 References 42 24,619 Sources 24,577 24,577 External links 2,296 2,296 Total 259,193 259,193 This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: "Topics that spark Misplaced Pages 'edit wars' revealed". BBC News. 18 July 2013. Retrieved 18 July 2013. Caitlin Dewey (6 November 2015). "Demon cats, helicopter escapes and crayon colours: The most fascinating Misplaced Pages articles you haven't read". National Post. Retrieved 10 November 2015. Omer Benkajob (27 April 2017). "Why Jimmy Wales' WikiTribune Won't Save the News". Haaretz. Retrieved 30 April 2017. Richard Cooke (17 February 2020). "Misplaced Pages Is the Last Best Place on the Internet". Wired. Retrieved 27 February 2020. Caitlin Dewey (5 November 2015). "The most fascinating Misplaced Pages articles you haven't read". The Washington Post. Retrieved 8 March 2023.

Frequently asked questions

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

Q3a: Is "virtually all scholars" a phrase that can be used in Misplaced Pages?

The issue was discussed on the talk page:

• Based on this Misplaced Pages search the phrase is widely used in Misplaced Pages.
• The definition of the term virtually is shown by the Merriam-Webster dictionary in clear terms.
• The term is directly used by the source in the article, and is used per the WP:RS/AC guideline to reflect the academic consensus.

Q3b: What about asking on the reliability noticeboard?

Yes, people involved in the page can discuss matters, but an independent opinion from the reliable source noticeboard can further clarify and confirm the sources. An outside opinion was requested on the noticeboard. The outside opinion there (by user:DGG) stated that the issue has been discussed there many times and that the statement in the article (that virtually all scholars of antiquity hold that Jesus existed) represents the academic consensus.

Q3c: What about the books that claim Jesus never existed?

The internet includes some such lists, and they have been discussed at length on the talk page, e.g. a list of over 20 such books was addressed in this talk page discussion. The list came from a non-WP:RS website and once it was analyzed it became clear that:

• Most of the authors on the list were not scholars in the field, and included an attorney, an accountant, a land surveyor, a film-maker, as well as a number of amateurs whose actual profession was less than clear, whose books were self-published and failed the WP:RS requirements. Some of the non-self-published authors on the list were found to just write popular books, have no academic position and not scholars, e.g. Christopher Hitchens.
• Some of the books on the list did not even deny the existence of Jesus, e.g. Burton Mack (who is a scholar) holds that Jesus existed but his death was not due to his challenge to Jewish authority, etc. Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman's work is about the Old Testament and not really related to Jesus. Tom Harpur holds that Jesus existed but mythical stories were later added to the gospel narratives about him.

The analysis of the list thus indirectly shed light on the scarcity of scholars who deny the existence of Jesus.

Q3d: Do we have to survey the scholars ourselves?

The formal Misplaced Pages guidelines require us not to do our own survey. The Misplaced Pages guideline WP:RS/AC specifically states: "The statement that all or most scientists or scholars hold a certain view requires reliable sourcing that directly says that all or most scientists or scholars hold that view." Given that the guideline then states: "statement in Misplaced Pages that academic consensus exists on a topic must be sourced rather than being based on the opinion or assessment of editors." we should not rely on our own surveys but quote a scholar who states the "academic consensus".

Q3e: Why even mention the existence of Jesus in the article lead?

A: This was discussed on the talk page. Although scholars at large see existence as a given, there are some self-published, non-scholarly books which question it, and hence non-scholars who read this article need to to have that issue clarified. And note that the statements regarding existence and other attributes need to be kept separate and stating that "Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus was from Galilee" would not be accurate, because scholarly agreement on existence is much stronger than on other items.

• Some of the most respected late-20th-century scholars involved in the study of the historical Jesus (e.g. Amy-Jill Levine, Geza Vermes, Paula Fredriksen) are Jewish. This trend is discussed in the 2012 book Soundings in the Religion of Jesus, by Bruce Chilton, Anthony Le Donne, and Jacob Neusner (ISBN 978-0-8006-9801-0, p. 132). While much of the older research in the 1950–1970 time frame may have involved Christian scholars (mostly in Europe) the 1980s saw an international effect and since then Jewish scholars have brought their knowledge of the field and made significant contributions. And one should note that the book is coauthored by the likes of Chilton and Neusner with quite different backgrounds. Similarly one of the main books in the field, The Historical Jesus in Context, by Amy-Jill Levine, Dale C. Allison Jr., and John Dominic Crossan (2006, ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6), is jointly edited by scholars with quite different backgrounds. In the late 20th and the 21st century Jewish, Christian and secular agnostic scholars have widely cooperated in research. The Muslim Reza Aslan wrote the number-one bestseller Zealot (2013).
• Regarding the existence of a historical Jesus, the article lead quotes Ehrman who is an agnostic and Price who is an atheist. Moreover, G. A. Wells who was widely accepted as the leader of the non-existence movement in the 20th century, abandoned that position and now accepts that the Q source refers to "a preacher" on whom parts of the gospels were based – although he believes that the supernatural claims were just stories that were then attributed to that preacher. That is reflected in his 2004 book Can We Trust the New Testament (pp. 49–50). While scholars continue to debate the historicity of specific gospel narratives, the agreement on the existence of Jesus is quite global.
• It is misleading to assume that Christian scholars will be biblical literalists who cannot engage in critical scholarship. Catholic and non-Evangelical Protestant scholars have long favoured the historical-critical method, which accepts that not all of the Bible can be taken literally. For example, the Christian clerics and scholars Michael Ramsey, C. F. D. Moule and James Dunn all argued in their scholarship that Jesus did not claim to be divine, Conrad Hyers, a Presbyterian minister, criticizes biblical literalism: "Literal clarity and simplicity, to be sure, offer a kind of security in a world (or Bible) where otherwise issues seem incorrigibly complex, ambiguous and muddy. But it is a false security, a temporary bastion, maintained by dogmatism and misguided loyalty."
• Finally, Misplaced Pages policies do not prohibit Buddhist scholars as sources on the history of Buddhism, Jewish scholars on Judaism, or Muslim scholars as sources on the history of Islam provided they are respected scholars whose works meet the general WP:RS requirements in terms of publisher reputation, etc.

• Hardly any scholars dispute the existence of Jesus or his crucifixion.
• A large majority of scholars agree that he debated the authorities and had "followers" – some scholars say there was a hierarchy among the followers, a few think it was a flat organization.
• More scholars think he performed some healings (given that Rabbinic sources criticize him for that etc., among other reasons) than those who say he never did, but less agreement on than the debates with authorities, etc.

Q6a: Was Jesus Jewish?

Yes, as mentioned in the article, but not in the infobox. An RfC at the Village Pump says to include religion in the infobox only if it's directly related to the subject's notability and there's consensus. Some editors want to include his religion in the infobox and others do not. With no consensus, the default is to leave the religion out of the box.

Q6b: Why is the birthplace not mentioned in the infobox?

The question came up in this discussion and there is no solid scholarly agreement on Bethlehem, so the infobox does not address that.

References

1. R.Kendall Soulen, Handbook of Biblical Criticism, Westminster John Knox Press (2001), p. 49
2. Hick, John (2006). The Metaphor of God Incarnate: Christology in a Pluralistic Age. Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. p. 27. ISBN 978-0-664-23037-1. Retrieved 5 January 2024.
3. Hyers, Conrad (Spring 2000). "Comparing biblical and scientific maps of origins". Directions: A Mennonite Brethren Forum. 29 (1): 16–26.
4. Hyers, Conrad (August 4–11, 1982). "Biblical Literalism: Constricting the Cosmic Dance". Christian Century. p. 823. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011. Retrieved 9 November 2012.

Jesus’ birth date and death date

In the article Historical Jesus. It says Jesus was born between 7-2 BC and died 30-36 AD. 69.204.59.102 (talk) 07:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes it does, under Historical_Jesus#Other_possibly_historical_elements. This article talks about it at Jesus#Chronology. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

He was born in 0 AD and died in30-33. Sheanobeano (talk) 14:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sheanobeano: See WP:CIR. Why? Year zero. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

First year of Anno Domini calender. Sorry, I didn't know that there's no year zero. I meant 1 AD Sheanobeano (talk) 18:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sheanobeano: It might surprise you, but Pope Benedictus XVI agrees with circa 4 BCE. There is no official dogma in Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, or Protestantism that Jesus was born in 1 CE. While born in 1 CE might be a popular superstition, it is not what the Church teaches. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that info. Sheanobeano (talk) 21:18, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

"While born in 1 CE might be a popular superstition" Not a superstition, an estimate by Dionysius Exiguus (6th century). We don't know what he based his estimate on, but it did not take into account the chronology of Herod the Great's reign. Dimadick (talk) 14:47, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Jesus's Death

On this wiki page it said that Jesus died of crucifixion. Jesus was crucified on the cross and he came back to life . He never died of crucifixion.Malaquia100 (talk) 20:21, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

In order to "come back to life," wouldn't one have to die first? With apologies to Salman Rushdie. Dumuzid (talk) 20:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Dumuzid. How could Jesus 'come back to life' if he didn't die? Sheanobeano (talk) 00:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The Miracle of Resurrection

Some scholars, notably Scholem Asch, have re-interpreted the life of Jesus and described the crucifixion as a painful and bloody mock event, in which the Jewish and Palestinian followers rescued Jesus, while the Roman and Temple authorities were duped into believing that the crucifixion happened. In this regard it is worthwhile to re-read the book The Nazarene, by this author and re-interpret the Gospels. If the crucifixion was a mock event, then it explains how Jesus appeared again to his followers and disciples. To avoid recapture Jesus and John may have emigrated to Patmos, with friends of Luke to look after them. Such a re-interpretation would indicate Jesus as co-author of the four Gospels and his brother James (in Jerusalem) being the Editor of the New Testament. The early life of Jesus, as described in the four Gospels would have been written by Mary and Joseph, the parents of Jesus. JohnEC Jr (talk) 05:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Umm, Asch was a dramatist, and this is just the Da Vinci Code. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

The content and story may be more relevant than the author per se. Also, of course they knew how to rescue a Rabi or lame the Roman Legions.JohnEC Jr (talk) 10:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

This topic was already discussed conclusively and archived in June/July. Were you hoping for a different answer by posting the exact same thing again? Jtrevor99 (talk) 13:08, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

The history has not changed. Neither has medicine nor resistance against the occupying Romans. The latter were lamed with sweetened wine and much more.JohnEC Jr (talk) 15:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Neither has the fact that, as was discussed previously by every editor who replied, that this is a fringe theory by a non-expert. It only belongs here if you find reliable sources. The answer has not, and will not, change on this. Jtrevor99 (talk) 16:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Anything related to "the miracle of the resurrection" is story-telling. All we can do as an encyclopedia is provide the opinions of the most prominent scholars as to related events at that time period. Sholem Asch does not appear to be among those scholars. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

The story is more relevant than the author.JohnEC Jr (talk) 19:29, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

In an encyclopedia, the source is always relevant. If this article was about the story of Jesus as told by a particular sect; that might be different. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:41, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

“The story is more relevant than the author.” By that maxim, we should include equally fringe theories by unreliable sources such as “Jesus was a space alien”. We are all trying to be patient, but your refusal to listen to the unanimous response from several editors that describes WP’s requirements for sourcing, especially on such an important article, and your bringing this up multiple times in the hope for a different answer, flirts with WP:POV pushing. For at least the sixth time, this only belongs if you can find reliable sources that cover this. Asch is, for reasons covered in the multiple prior responses by multiple editors, not a scholar or WP:RS in this field. Jtrevor99 (talk) 00:47, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Is Scholem Asch not a source. Why not? Was there only one Rabi to be rescued from the Romans? There was a system in place! Scholem Asch knew but why does no one else seem to know or want to know?JohnEC Jr (talk) 01:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, a random novelist was undoubtedly endowed with an esoteric ken. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Thinking of it this way, what are the implications for the past two thousand years, and the future?JohnEC Jr (talk) 09:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Redirect: Christ

Premise: the human or divine figure of Jesus is the main topic of many different articles, the prominent ones being: Jesus, Christ (title), Jesus in Christianity, Jesus in Islam, etc. Now, the doubt: the page Christ currently redirects to Jesus, but wouldn't it be more appropriate to redirect Christ to Christ (title)? In the end, there wouldn't be any confusion, both pages exclusively talk about Jesus, but the latter at least focuses on his title. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 03:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I think the reasoning is that when someone types christ into WP, the Jesus article is what they're after, in general. Therefore, the current redirect is mostly helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Yeah, maybe, but despite both words refer to the same person, theologically and enciclopedically speaking they're not exactly the same concept. Btw the page Christ (title) has a link to Jesus right at the beginning of its lead, so the people looking for that page could still easily find it. In other words, redirecting it shouldn't generate any confusion, but – if necessary – we could also place a disambiguation note on top of the article. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 02:05, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Veery few readers are likely to want this rather advanced article, which gets c. 630 views a day, vs 11,300 here. Johnbod (talk) 02:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Johnbod: Well, that's pretty easy to get all those views when you literally have 119 redirects. That's quite the issue here. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 23:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't really affect the issue here at all. Johnbod (talk) 02:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

It's not the issue - rather, it's proof of the point made by Grabergs and Johnbod. The article has 119 redirects because it's popular and very frequently sought - not the other way around. Look at the stats for the redirects themselves for proof. Jtrevor99 (talk) 13:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Gråbergs and others. Btw, there would be no point making Christ a redirect to Christ (title). If that was the approach Christ (title) should just be moved to Christ. DeCausa (talk) 14:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Agree with the others that the existing redirect configuration looks correct per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. VQuakr (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

What Jesus taught about money and wealth

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like to edit this page in order to expound on what Jesus taught about money and wealth, as it was a large (although often overlooked) focal point of his teachings. The page even shows an image of Jesus speaking with the "rich young ruler", but it makes no mention of what Jesus said to this man regarding his need to sell his possessions and give the money to the poor. Jesus taught this same thing to his disciples, the pharisees, and a large crowd of people following him. And in his sermon on the mount he talked extensively about money in relation to one's service to God, and God's ability to provide the things money normally buys (food and clothing). Brownt20 (talk) 18:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

We aren't interested in your personal opinions, not even in your personal reading of the Bible. WP:CITE WP:SOURCES for your claims. Meaning highbrow sources, the Bible won't do, see WP:RSPSCRIPTURE. tgeorgescu (talk) 19:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

I fail to see how my request to edit the article amounts to "personal opinion". I'm talking about simply inserting more of Jesus' teachings into the section labeled as "teachings". If the Bible is not a source of Jesus' teachings, then there are many other teachings in this article which should be considered invalid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownt20 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Comment re: The Bible is not a reliable source: In order to better explain this to new editors such as @Steven1107: it's probably best to define terms for them. When "we" (Wikipedians) say "reliable source", we mean that something is suitable for citing what is stated in an article. For anything that is interpretive in nature, a WP:SECONDARY source is necessary. In the instance tgeorgescu is refering to, the Bible is the WP:PRIMARY source and does not explicitly say what you're saying it says - it's an interpretation. If you intend to say anything other than "the mystery of God is fulfilled in the days of the trumpet call by the 7th angel", then you need a reliable secondary source. To say that "biblically" or "scripturally" this means "completion" is interpretive. Secondary sources must meet the qualification of WP:RS (although a minority viewpoint could potentially be included, but in such a case, it would have to be WP:ATTRIBUTION rather than simply stated as fact). To sum up, when writing about something the Bible says, unless what you are adding is explicitly stated in the text, then you must have a reliable secondary source to cite. If you don't understand why, then go back to what I stated above and read the linked policies until you do understand it.

That being said, some of what is in this edit is OK, because it's straight from the text and is verifiable without interpretation; but some of it is very clearly not. For example: "third trimester of her pregnancy" - the text does not say this explicitly. It would seem to be implied since she gives birth right away, but it's not stated. Some of the other things are OK because they are stated in the text. If you don't understand what's OK and what's not OK, ask. But don't simply re-apply your exact edits when reverted - that's edit warring and we take a dim view of that. We are a collaborative environment. If your edit was reverted, pay attention to the reason given, and discuss on the talk page if you're not sure. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Copy/pasted by tgeorgescu (talk) 19:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Per Butlerblog above: the article Christian views on poverty and wealth may provide some secondary sources that would pass muster. The New Testament section of that article uses far too much primary sourcing, but several of the secondary sources appear reasonable. Alternatively, one could simply link to that article from this one. Jtrevor99 (talk) 22:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Surrendering one's life to Jesus

The article is missing the topic on surrendering one's life to Jesus, also called giving your life to Jesus (often in form of prayer, for example the so-called "Salvation Prayer" or "Sinner's Prayer"). And as an example see this message with the salvation prayer in 100+ languages: https://message-for-you.net/languages/ 77.8.49.228 (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

See: Sinner's prayer. I don't think we want to get well into particular branches of Christianity in an article about Jesus. That's long after his time. And that is definitely not a reliable source. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages featured articles
• Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
• Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
• Old requests for peer review
• Articles copy edited by the Guild of Copy Editors
• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• FA-Class biography articles
• FA-Class biography (core) articles
• Core biography articles
• Top-importance biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• FA-Class Religion articles
• Top-importance Religion articles
• WikiProject Religion articles
• FA-Class Christianity articles
• Top-importance Christianity articles
• FA-Class Christian theology articles
• Top-importance Christian theology articles
• Christian theology work group articles
• FA-Class Catholicism articles
• Top-importance Catholicism articles
• WikiProject Catholicism articles
• FA-Class Eastern Orthodoxy articles
• Top-importance Eastern Orthodoxy articles
• WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy articles
• FA-Class Oriental Orthodoxy articles
• Top-importance Oriental Orthodoxy articles
• WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy articles
• FA-Class Jewish Christianity articles
• Top-importance Jewish Christianity articles
• WikiProject Jewish Christianity articles
• FA-Class Anglicanism articles
• Top-importance Anglicanism articles
• WikiProject Anglicanism articles
• FA-Class Latter Day Saint movement articles
• Top-importance Latter Day Saint movement articles
• WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement articles
• WikiProject Christianity articles
• FA-Class Bahá'í Faith articles
• High-importance Bahá'í Faith articles
• WikiProject Bahá'í Faith articles
• FA-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
• High-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
• All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages
• FA-Class Greek articles
• High-importance Greek articles
• Byzantine world task force articles
• WikiProject Greece general articles
• All WikiProject Greece pages
• FA-Class Islam-related articles
• Mid-importance Islam-related articles
• WikiProject Islam articles
• FA-Class Judaism articles
• Mid-importance Judaism articles
• FA-Class Ancient Near East articles
• Mid-importance Ancient Near East articles
• Ancient Near East articles by assessment
• Misplaced Pages articles that use American English
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press