 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Do Wikipedia judge what is orthodox and what is heretical? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.70.2.250 (talk) 00:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
As there are other 'Naassene Fragments' (e.g. Hippolytus, Refutatio, 5.2[1]) it may be better to refer to this fragment as 'the Naassene Psalm', e.g. [2] (Rosenkreutzer (talk) 01:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC))
i am thinking someone needs to have a look at the Analysis section. although i've updated the language a bit, it's still very dense and definitely not accessible to a layperson, plus it seems to be making a lot of assertions not supported by any citations or works. these might well be original statements describing the author's position and they honestly probably don't belong on the wiki page for the Fragment itself - they sound more like excerpts from a general essay on the author's opinions about Gnosticism in general. and ugh, the language, seriously. - anonymous ip user — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.111.201 (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)