Talk:Insight on the Scriptures

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Jehovah's Witnesses. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

I believe that "Insight on the Scriptures" does give some information (though not as detailed) on each of the deuterocanonical books. Winston (PL)

As far as I remember, it contains something like a paragraph or two in some article where it does a glorified 'books like these aren't inspired.' I seem to remember that it confuses two of the books with each other, and that's about it.Tommstein 02:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

The article states: "Subjects such as the trinity, theology, and apostolic succession do not have their own headings, as Jehovah's Witnesses claim there is no direct mention of them in the Bible." This is unnecessarily confrontational, as the topics are indeed not explicitly defined in the bible, and the publication is a doctrinal encyclopaedia of the Witnesses, and need not cover such topics. The sentence should be re-worded or removed completely.--Jeffro77 03:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

The only thing is, the article starts out by claiming that this is also a Bible encyclopedia, not just an expounding of Witness doctrine. Although all that is required to fix that is taking out like two words. The problem with taking the position that 'such and such is or isn't taught in the Bible' in articles is that plenty of other religions would beg to differ about what the Bible 'really' says.Tommstein 07:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe saying that it is an "encyclopaedia of Bible topics as interpreted by Jehovah's Witnesses" would be appropriate?--Jeffro77 04:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

It certainly is accurate, and works for me.Tommstein 23:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)