Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manner of the Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Jaranda wat's sup 04:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Manner of the Kingdom

The subject of this article is the legal code promulgated on the occasion of King Saul's accession to the throne. There is no indication that this collection of laws is called "Manner of the Kingdom" (or indeed anything else) in biblical scholarship, so this ought to be deleted as original research. Dr Zak 04:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

They constitute something of a walled garden, don't they? Dr Zak 20:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Lost books of the Old Testament. This actually is not something just made up by a user. One of the early fathers of the Mormon church, James Edward Talmage, wrote a book called The Articles of the Faith. In that book, he listed works that are referenced in the Bible, but for which we actually have no extant copy. "Manner of the Kingdom", which he also called "Book of Statutes" (I guess the title is catchier) was among them. For more information, [1] and [2] are from a Christian article refuting Talmage's claims. At any rate, this is not just something made up on Wikipedia, however, that said, there could not possibly be enough information about this supposed lost book to make an article. Thus, redirecting it would seem to be reasonable. BigDT 22:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete and Redirect per BigDT. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:24, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • One other comment just as an "oh and by the way" - I looked up 1 Samuel 10:25 in a Bible commentary that I use in my own study and it says that (in the view of this commentator anyway) Samuel was likely talking about the first part of 1 Samuel itself, not about some other book out there. I mention this not as a statement of theological truth, but only in order to point out that it is not universally accepted (or even prominently accepted) that a book by this title ever even existed. BigDT 17:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • No Position The New Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Version, in the note for 1 Samuel 10:25 leaves it open that it could be a separate 'lost' book. The comment is, "The rights and duties of the kingship probably set out the responsibilities of king and people to each other. The expression here is nearly identical to 'the ways of the king' in 8.9,11, although they may not refer to the same document". And, the The Bible Knowledge Commentary edited by Walvoord and Zuck leaves it open stating on page 442, "All that Samuel could do was invest Saul with his authority and responsibility as outlined in a scroll prepared for this occasion of coronation (1 Sam 10:25). Undoubtedly the scroll included the Mosaic regulations for kingship found in Deuteronomy 17:14-17."--P Todd 02:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. As with the rash of AfDs proposed by originator against other articles from this general topic, this is, at most, a stub. It's new, the author hasn't had time yet to finish working on it, and it is encyclopedic. Furthermore, "Mormon" commentary above is irrelevent. As noted in new source (of which there are many more to follow), this one by John Wesley, this specific topic has been discussed by religious scholars for centuries, long before there were any "Mormons". Since citations are being added, and the article is only a few days old, AfD nomination is outrageously premature. --The Editrix 20:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete no redirect as original research. There is nothing in these sources provided to suggest there is a textual work called the "Manner of the Kingdom" that was at one time included in the Old Testament and later lost or removed. I actually don't even see anything in the sources that seriously suggests such a work ever existed at all. Wesley's statment appears to be an attempt to clarify and explain the meaning of the passage, not a statement that "Manner of the Kingdom" existed as an separate text worthy of biblical status. I don't agree with BigDT's redirect because Lost books of the Old Testament is itself suggested for merge to Non-canonical books referenced in the Bible and really is not in anyway a discussion of Talmage's claims.--Isotope23 17:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.