Talk:Daniel's Vision of Chapter 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Judaism Portal Daniel's Vision of Chapter 8 is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles.
Project Judaism To-do: edit purge watch Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: Jewish and Biblical Units of Measurement or some such name, to include material of Ancient Hebrew units of measurement but also Talmudic units and use in Halacha (a la the Hebrew Wikipedia article he:מידות ומשקלות תורניים) Collaboration of the week { Cleanup: Jewish mythology - needs to be rewritten to be inline with our other mythology articles. Expand: Yom Ha'atzmaut - quite short for an article of such importance Wikiversity: School of Jewish Studies. Part of the new open content university, Wikiversity. Stubs: Category:Judaism stubs, Category:Tanakh stubs, Category:Synagogue stubs Update: Portal:Judaism is WikiProject Judaism's frequently updated portal. You can help make this the best portal on Wikipedia. Look at the talk page to see how you can help. Template loop detected: Template:WikiProject Judaism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is supported by WikiProject Bible, an attempt to promote the creation, maintainance, and improvement of articles dealing with the Bible. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions
???	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.

[edit] New?

There's no talk here? Is this new? Are there any other articals related to Daniel chapter 8? Rush4hire 08:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes this is new. Look at the links at the bottom to see some related links Allenroyboy 14:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] paraphrase illustration

The illustration merely takes the Bible as it is written (NIV) and physically arranges the texts into parallel according to obvious related words, and phrases. This is exactly what the word paraphrase means. There is nothing new added to the Bible or taken away. This is completely a NPOV. Allenroyboy 17:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The Original Research tag has been added because this article appears to contain the analysis and interpretation of a single individual (judging by the article's edit history), with no reference to any secondary sources (Daniel commentaries, monographs, articles, etc.). What may be an "obvious" analysis to you may not be to others. This may be a worthwhile article, but please improve it by adding the views of some commentators and other experts on the subject. Thanks, Tonicthebrown 09:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The pharaphrase illustration is just that, a paraphrase where a statement or remark {the Bible verse} is explained in other words or another way, so as to simplify or clarify its meaning. The source is the Bible. The dream and the interpretation/s in the text were simply put in another way-- i.e., side by side. It still says exactly the same thing as the original text. Allenroyboy 18:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The problem is not the "paraphrase" or illustration in itself. It is that the analysis is based on someone's private judgment, without any citation or verification. Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable, which means it must be supported by a published work. In this case we would be looking for a qualified commentator on Daniel, or something similar. Thanks Tonicthebrown 05:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by "the analysis?" Are you refering to "Synthesis of the Dream and Interpretation", "Proposed Identifications of the Kingdoms", or "Principles of Interpretation?"

The "Synthesis of the Dream and Interpretation" is merely a restatment or paraphrease of the illustration. The "Proposed Identifications of the Kingdoms" merely repeates the identifications done within the text. The "Principles of Interpretation?" just reiterates what the texts say that certain symbols mean. Allenroyboy 16:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I apologise if I have not been clear in my explanation. By "the analysis" I am referring mainly to the table/illustration under "Parallel Paraphrase of the Dream and Interpretation". However the article as a whole needs references. As I said, it would be appropriate to make use of some good Daniel commentaries from across a range of Christian POVs. Tonicthebrown 10:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm puzzled why you are concerned about the parallel paraphrase illustrations for Daniel 7 and 8 and yet have not said anything about the parallel paraphrase illustration in the Daniel 2 article. I made and placed that illustration (and the table at the end). And, I used EXACTLY the same literary methodology for all three illustrations. I wonder if you have read the illustrations in comparison with the actual text. The illustrations read, from top to bottom--left to right, just like the original text. Allenroyboy 04:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The table in Daniel 2 article is original research as well. Tonicthebrown 11:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The wikipedia Paraphrase page states

"A paraphrase (from the Greek paraphrasis) is a statement or remark explained in other words or another way, so as to simplify or clarify its meaning."

The paraphrase illustration on this page is ONLY a paraphrase, putting the text in another way physically so that the text itself clarifies its own meaning. The paraphrase is NOT an analysis. It is simply a paraphrase. Paraphrasing is a long established and well founded technique on Wikipedia.

And, as was said above, the synthesis is merely a recapitulation of the paraphrased illustration. The only POV is that of the text itself. It does not matter whether someone likes what the text itself says or not. Therefore I am removing false assertion of original research.

If some feel that men's opinions, as expressed in this or that commentary, are needed because they are unable to understand for themselves what the Bible says, they are welcome to add them to the article. ---Christian Skeptic 04:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)