Talk:Book of Jeremiah/Archive 1

Archive 1

The Prophet Jeremiah

The beginning of the section on "The Prophet Jeremiah" begins with this text: "The Prophet Jeremiah is the book that describes was a son of a priest from Anatot in the land of Benjamin, who lived in the last years of the Kingdom of Judah [...]"

There's obviously something wrong with this; it's not even a grammatical sentence. Meaningwise, too, I assume it should say that the Prophet Jeremiah was/is said to have been a person, not a book. I'm not sure how best to fix it though. 68.252.44.110 (talk) 13:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

"According to" is adequate attribution. WP:NPOV prohibits taking a position on which points of view editors believe are correct, so once viewpoints are appropriately attributed deprecatory statements like "said to" shouldn't be used. Otherwise we'd have to say "said to" for everything. If you think the statement can be simplified, change it. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 14:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that looks much better. (And thanks also for the information about how to handle such cases.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steorra (talk • contribs) 05:15, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Hebrew Meaning

יִרְמְיָהוּ Yirməyāhū - the "yahu"part refers to God...(For example, http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Netanyahu.html states that Netanyahu is derived from "Gift of God")

Something should be added (with reference if possible) indicating the Hebrew rootmeaning of "Yirmiyahu" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.84.179.9 (talk) 19:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

His buying a field

I added this small section in the 'Prophetic Acts' section. It seems important because centuries later the blood-money Judas got for betraying Jesus was also used to purchase a field. Here the symbolism is very different tho, as is the price - 17 silver shekels in Jeremiah; 40 pieces of silver in the NT. SmokeyTheCat 11:41, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Npov

Conservative scholars argue only Baruch edited Jeremiah. There is no consensus on later edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.131.161.184 (talk) 01:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Heavily Edited

"Both versions are heavily edited and reflect the perspectives of later ages" - this appears prejudicial at least from the standpoint that there are alternative views and explanations for the differences. Since the majority of the Book of Jeremiah is preserved with about 15-17% variance in content (not order of content), to say the book is heavily edited can be misunderstood. It would be better to explain what is meant by heavily edited, and give at least a paragraph or two on why that paradigm is better than the concept that contents have been preserved. JohnRajendra (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

After reading over the source material provided for the disputed point, the word "redacted" seems to have triggered the use of "heavily edited". In checking the context of the source, the issue seems to be talking more about the problems with having two different versions of Jeremiah that, while parts of it are the same, other parts differ. I've changed the sentence to the following one in light of that information:

"Scholars have had differing opinions as to how to reconstruct the historical aspects of the Book of Jeremiah due to the differences each version contains when compared with each other."

That change also required the source to include p.85 in addition to p.86.
If there's any problems with the edit or otherwise, please let me know. Thanks, Azureindignation (talk) 01:06, 27 November 2015 (UTC)