Talk:Millennialism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Anthropology.
This project provides a central approach to Anthropology-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] POV
There's a lot of good information in this article, but it's loaded with opinion as well. I've restructured it, retaining all of the original material, with the intention of presenting the definition of Millennialism preceding instead of following the comparative religion analysis. ...
... And, in my opinion, all of the comparative stuff should be the start of a new page on Utopianism (with a good teaser to invite interest - because, it really is good stuff; it just doesn't have much directly to do with Millennialism, per se). -- Mkmcconn
- Millennialsim has nothing to do with the Messianic Age. The foretelling of the Messianic age shadows the Millenium Messiah hype. - Eisenmond 18:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I've noticed this tendency in Wikipedia to create more and more new pages whenever I think a comprehensive survey might do the trick. So maybe you, Mkmcconn, or someone else will create that new article. I'm not so sure about the text being "loaded with opinion" -- I really tried to observe the NPOV guidelines. Anyway, thanks for the "good stuff" bit. -- KF 15:06 Nov 5, 2002 (UTC)
- I do apologize for not being more courteous in making my comments. The article already exists, now, at Utopianism. If you read it there, I think that you might agree with me that it's complete in its own right. I left the same material in the Millennialism article, and I wonder if you won't agree with me that it is more neutral now that it's put at the end instead of at the beginning? But, you may not agree with me that the material at the end could be deleted, and replaced with a more brief summary and link to Utopianism. — Mkmcconn
-
- There's really no need to apologize for anything. You have added valuable information -- but you seem to be much more of sn expert. All I'm saying is that if I had thought that the material I added belonged to separate articles I would have split it up. Basically, I think there's nothing wrong with different types of articles within one enyclopedia (in one of the old Britannica editions they called it "Macro" and "Micro" or something like that, i e general versus in-depth information). So please delete the parts you have moved. Personally, I like reading texts that lead you from one thing to another step by step.
-
- All the best :) KF 16:10 Nov 5, 2002 (UTC)
-
-
- Hopefully the two articles can grow in a complementary way. A passer-by added titles which, although they don't perfectly fit the contents at the moment, do suggest a good structure for the article (in my opinion). It would be interesting to see more about the Millennial teachings of Zoroastrianism and Judaism. I hope you won't let me force an idea onto the work that you have done in a way that cools your interest in the work, though. It's much less gratifying if that happens when it isn't necessary. -- Mkmcconn
-
The first two sentences of the section on the early church and premillennialism are a direct quotation from the article cited as a source and should be documented as such. This opening paragraph makes claims which are disputed. In particular, to say that millenialism was "normative" in the Church is certainly an overstatement, as the quotation from Justin that follows demonstrates. The Catholic Encyclopedia (admittedly not an unbiased source) says this,
"Though millenarianism had found numerous adherents among the Christians and had been upheld by several ecclesiastical theologians, neither in the post-Apostolic period nor in the course of the second century, does it appear as a universal doctrine of the Church or as a part of the Apostolic tradition."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10307a.htm
Furthermore, the statement that "Tertullian, Commodian, Lactantius, Methodius, and Apollinaris of Laodicea all advocated premillennial doctrine" ought to be qualified. While it is technically true, some explanation should be given that distinguishes their "premillenial" views from the views which are referenced by that term today.
Andy kaylor 19:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Annus or anus?
On 2 February 2004 an anonymous contributor edited the Millennialism article (which had not been edited for more than a year) and changed it considerably. I would ask anyone knowledgeable about the subject to check if the alterations are okay. What I certainly don't like is confusing terminology, which was also introduced today. In any case we should make sure it's millennium and millennia. <KF> 09:43, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
What has Hiler has to do with this page? Pure nonsense. Not every graziness has to be called eschatology.
- What is relevant here is not Hitler as a person, it's the fact that millennial thinking did play a (minor) role in Nazi ideology. As the original article was much longer, less emphasis was seemingly placed on the Third Reich. Why do you say "pure nonsense", User:80.133.106.218? <KF> 14:43, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Could someone please weave in the Fifth Monarchy Men into this article? Philip Baird Shearer 13:37, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This information is very knowledgeable, but how can we believe what we read if the information is able to be edited by anyone who visits the site?
[edit] Premillennialism
Since the major views on the Millennium of Revelation 20 are Premillennialism, Postmillennialism, and Amillennialism, I'm wondering why only the latter two have their own article, while the former redirects to here.--PeterR 20:22, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
-
- Short answer...no one has written it yet. :-) --Cberlet 22:03, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- They have now. Arcan 13:06, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
-
[edit] I see the Millennium reign of Christ as the chance for mankind
In my opinion, the Millennium reign of Christ is the time when mankind will have the chance to be redeemed. The Gospel Age was for the church to be gathered, chiseled and transformed into spiritual beings. The Millennium is for the world which was not called to be part of the Church but will be called to obey God's laws which will be implemented here on Earth with the help of the invisible, powerful, spiritual Church.
Every single soul that lived on this Earth will be resurected and asked to obey God's perfect laws in order to receive eternal human (not spiritual as the Church) life on Earth.
Salvation of mankind is not for this time of Gospel Age, only for the Church the "Bride of Christ"
[edit] keeping messianic age separate from millinialism
the phrase "messianic age" is a catch phrase used by Judaism to speak about the "Olam Ha Ba" or the Age to Come. It has a distinctly Jewish feel to it and I don't think they would appreciate amalgumating it into the millenial article because that is primarily a Christian article. The messianic age is similar but in my opinion distinct enough to keep as a separate entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SlaveOFchrist (talk • contribs) 01:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC).
Yes, I think it is relevant historical information, but should be a link, and not necessarily part of article. S.W. April 12, 2007 8:41 EDT
- Yes. Millenialism is too broad to put into Messianic Age, and Messianic Age is important in other religions including Judaism, so it should not be inserted here. I am removing the merge template. nadav 02:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Millennialism and Nazism
The reference quoted: - [...] einem tausendjährigen Volk mit tausendjähriger geschichtlicher und kultureller Vergangenheit für die vor ihm liegende unabsehbare Zukunft eine ebenbürtige tausendjährige Stadt zu bauen [...]. [...] to build a millennial city adequate [in splendour] to a thousand year old people with a thousand year old historical and cultural past, for its never-ending [glorious] future [...]
This suggests to me that Hitler believed he was building a new city for a people/empire which had already lasted for a thousand years not as it has been interpreted lasting for a thousand years:
- "Hitler's "Third Reich" ("Drittes Reich", "Tausendjähriges Reich"), which, in his vision, would last for a thousand years - but which in reality only lasted for 12 years (1933-1945)."
Needs correcting??203.173.159.108 13:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
