Talk:Psalm 51
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I know there's little scholarly support for the entire book of Psalms being written by David, but is this really one of the Psalms that higher criticism attributes to someone else? Is a specific citation available? Wesley 03:01, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
Basically, higher criticism splits the psalms into large groups, roughly 4 or 5 +psalm 151. It tends to believe that each group existed as an earlier seperate work, and that some of the psalms are rival versions of one another (one in one work, the other within another). It is generally believed that none of these groups were by david. For example, "by the rivers of babylon" is clearly written after the date David would be required to live. Some psalms even indicate the real author, or collector by name (although this is less obvious in texts that are just a collection of psalms, e.g. for liturgical use). ~~~~ 07:56, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Revised Standard version copyright?
On what basis are we using the Revised Standard version text?--agr 04:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Replace KJV with Coverdale Psalter
I move that the KJV of the psalm be replaced with that from the psalter of the Book of Common prayer, which, for 400 was by far the most common "traditional" version of the psalm, since the KJV of the psalter was not included in the revisions of the BCP, but rather, the previous Coverdale psalter was used. Most importantly, the Coverdale/BCP version is the one which is universally used in English musical settings.
Did the original Latin Vulgate use the appropiate accent marks?
[edit] Miserere (Allegri)
Can somebody put one of those links at the top of this page saying "If you meant Miserere, a piece of religious music by Gregorio Allegri, click "here". This would redirect the user to: Miserere_(Allegri) Cheers 86.17.156.127 16:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Text
I think there is no reason to print the text here. Particularly problematic is an English translation labelled "Septuagint"; the Septuagint is of course Greek. In general we don't just print chapters of the Bible in wikipedia articles devoted to those texts, and I'd hate to see this become the norm. If there is no compelling reason for this psalm, in particular, to have the text, then it should be removed, and inaccurate labels should be fixed. Tb (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. (But I can see why the recent "Septuagint" might have happened; there were already three translations (long-standing), so the recent editor simply added another.) Also, the various templates already point to various versions. Is there a "Psalms" project where "trans-Psalm" (ugh!) policy like this can be discussed? If not, then the place for discussion should probably be Talk:Psalms.
- Propose: Delete all four translations about a week from now unless agreed otherwise.
- Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Oh, I don't blame the recent editor! It's so inviting, that's why I am motivated to punt them all, or chaos will ensue. ;) Many of the psalms have this going on, so I agree with your proposal, which should probably be mentioned on each and discussion on Talk:Psalms. Ugh. Tb (talk) 21:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Drop text
It is proposed on Talk:Psalms to drop the text of psalms from the individual psalm articles. If you wish to weigh in, please do so there. Tb (talk) 21:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)