This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Righteousness article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Its all for fakers
edit"Righteousness ... In one sense, it is an attribute of God whereby He is said to be holy and righteous." "...In another sense it refers to the righteousness of man"
The article basically says "righteousness is righteousness." This gives absolutely no useful information to the reader.
"Righteousness ... In one sense, it is an attribute of God whereby He is said to be holy and righteous." "...In another sense it refers to the righteousness of women"
The article basically says "righteousness is righteousness." This gives absolutely no useful information to the reader. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.147.208.150 (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Sola gratia
editThe article should explain the link between righteousness and divine grace ; there is an impressive demonstration given in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. ADM (talk) 13:01, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Righteousness in Hinduism
editThis is an important term in Hinduism, too (and in Buddhism). http://www.radiosai.org/pages/thought.asp, for example here:
"19th November 2009 Ladies Day Thought for the day What we have to safeguard and protect today are Truth and Righteousness and not the nation. When Truth and Righteousness are protected, they will protect the nation. Hence, righteousness should be fostered in every home............"
One can build a little section for the article's page.
POV article?
editThe term is claimed as originally and exclusively a theological concept. Besides the bald statement of the introduction, no evidence is provided to support this. The interpretation of the etymology seems entirely a POV/OR statement. It is not sourced and while evidence of the use of the term in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam is provided this is not by any means sufficient. The idea that the word was "remodelled" is not sourced and whether its FIRST use was in Tyndall's bible is neither demonstrated nor sourced. It's use in the early 16c. as an "alteration of rightwise, from Old English rihtwis .. Suffix altered by influence of courteous, etc" is Etymonline's more reasoned NPOV entry. This article seems contentious and should be tagged as such unless there is serious sourcing to substantiate its primary claim. LookingGlass (talk) 03:17, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Righteousness
editcaldwell 41.191.104.239 (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)