Talk:Joachim

Merge
Imran should be a separate entry from Joachim so that religious interests do not supercede scholarly ones —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.82.166.38 (talk • contribs).

neutral - though I do think that if it is decided to keep the articles separate they would both benefit from mentioning that Joachim and Imran are one and the same person (i.e. the father of Mary/Maryam) known by different names by two faiths (presumably there are also two different versions of his life). Wikipidian 22:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose There is no similarity between the two except that they point to the same historical figure (mostly) about whom nothing is known outside the two faith traditions. The beliefs about Imran and Joachim have nothing in common. Someone looking for info on Imran won't care much about Joachim and vice versa. Also, the only potential significant expansion of either article seems to be the controversy regarding Imran being the same person as Amran according to the Qur'an. This dispute is confusing enough without adding Joachim to the mix. --Ephilei 05:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose Imran and Joachim belong to two different traditions. The internal link in See also should be enough. Maybe the person described in the other tradition could be mentioned, but definitely not merge. D e lta Tango | Talk 23:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Move back to Joachim
An editor, without discussion, moved the page from Joachim to Joachim (Saint). In addition to this title having capitalization issues, this article had for a long time been at Joachim. I believe that this person is the most notable person named Joachim and deserves to be in the parent article name. There is no reason for the disambig (Saint). The choice of "Saint" is POV because not all Christian traditions accept sainthood. If anything, the article should be at Joachim (Christianity) or something along those lines. That said, I feel strongly that this article should be returned to Joachim, where it stood for a long time.-Andrew c 23:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The editor happens to be the sysop who closed the AfD and spent a long time trying to untangle the convoluted edit histories of the two pages (Joachim and Joachim (Star Trek) due to some ill-performed cut-and-paste moves, but I guess that doesn't matter, does it [[image:smile.png]]. By the way, you're welcome. -- Avi 05:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not POV to use the phrase, "Joachim (Saint)" any more than it would be to use the phrase, "Jesus Christ" to make clear that the Christian figure is being referenced, not someone else by that (common) name. Using the phrase "Jesus Christ" does not mean that Jesus was, in an encyclopedic sense, "Christ"--why does "Joachim (Saint)" mean that Joachim was a saint? Any reasonable person would simply conclude that the article is about a person named Joachim, who is one of the saints of some Christian sects.
 * When you consider the fact that even Mary does not link directly to the article about the Virgin Mary, why should Joachim link directly to a far less-known person? Mary and Joachim are both very common names; frankly, it is more likely that people searching for Joachim are looking for information about the name, not the saint.-69.47.186.226 05:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Its standard disambig to have parentheses with additional information after a name. There's a "Joachim (Star trek)", which I hardly think is POV.--THobern 05:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by THobern (talk • contribs).

In the other languages, when you search Joachim and want additional information in english, you are disapointed because we are confused. joachim is linked to Saint_Joachim. and then you change the language and you are in Saint_Joachim : So you have lost Joachim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.147.240.221 (talk) 06:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

"Of the house of Amram"?
This article says that "In the Gospel of James, Joachim is described as a rich and pious man of the house of Amram..." I don't see anything in the Gospel of James which says that Joachim was of the House of Amram, or a Levite. In fact, in the Gospel of James 10.1 it says, "And there was a council of the priests, saying: Let us make a veil for the temple of the Lord. And the priest said: Call to me the undefiled virgins of the family of David. And the officers went away, and sought, and found seven virgins. And the priest remembered the child Mary, that she was of the family of David, and undefiled before God." This actually seems to indicate that Joachim was of the House of David, not Amram. - 71.233.205.50 (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

In fact, Luke says that Mary was the cousin of Elizabeth, who he says was a descendant of Aaron the high priest, placing her in the tribe of Levi, not David’s tribe. Moreover, in Luke 2:4, the author writes that the reason it was necessary for Joseph and Mary to return to Bethlehem was because it was Joseph, not Mary, who was from the House of David﻿ Zakkour (talk) 05:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

San Joaquin
I have added a reference to San Joaquin, California, since a similar reference is made to Santa Ana in the article on St. Anne. Caeruleancentaur (talk) 12:34, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation
It would be helpful if the article included guidance on the pronunciation of this name. John M Baker (talk) 14:21, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * There appear to be regional variations. In places with a significant Jewish population it would probably follow the Hebrew pronunciation, which would be something like Yo-a-chim, with a guttural "ch". In German it would be Yo-ACH-em, Massachusetts and parts of New York are closer to the German: Jo-ACK-em. The "j" is different in French: zhwa-KIM. In the US it is most often found as a popular name among Spanish-speakers: wa-KEEN. I think it may depend on where you grew up. I'm not sure how one would explain the various versions for the article, however. Mannanan51 (talk) 01:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

"In Islam" section
It's very doubtful whether Imran was originally the Islamic equivalent of Joachim. It's more likely that the fact that the Qur'an calls Mary the "sister of Aaron" and "daughter of Imran" means that there was confusion between Mary mother of Jesus and Miriam sister of Moses (two figures who were at least a thousand years apart). Imran certainly seems to mean Amram in verse 3:33, and it's likely that it does elsewhere in the Qur'an as well... AnonMoos (talk) 17:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joachim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160402100918/http://www.worldmeeting2015.org/spirituality-center/ss-family/st-joachim/ to http://www.worldmeeting2015.org/spirituality-center/ss-family/st-joachim/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Error in the Quran in Surah 3:33-45
The Quran falsely states that Amrams wife has given birth to Mary who gave birth to Jesus. Problems: Amram`s wife has given birth to Miriam, not Mary. Mary lived 1400 years after Amram and the father of Mary is named Joachim. Miriam and Mary are both named "Maryam" in arabic but Miriam was the "sister of Aaron" and "daughter of Amram(Surah 66:12)", not Mary.

62.226.82.218 (talk) 23:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * So are these linguistic, historical, or theological problems? Mary is an English name, Miriam and Maryam Semitic. "Sister of Aaron" is easy to explain using Semitic cognates. Produce one hadith or Qur'an verse contradicting 66:12, if you can. ～ POKéTalker（═◉═） 05:26, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Saints in the Bible
How can the subject article be saint if the related apocrypha isn't recognized in the Biblical canon? That simple reason shall apply at least for the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Catholic Church. It would be very strange saint Pope Pius X did something that had been excluded from the Tridentine Calendar. The Wp article doesn't cite any Christian nor Patristic author who had doubted of that paternity, as if the Biblical canon was broader than the Modernist one and it included the Gospel of James.Philosopher81sp (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Isnt biblical Amram the quranical reference for Imran?
Amram and the father of Mary are two seperate, different persons. 62.226.91.170 (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)