Template talk:Books of Nevi'im

Jewish only?
The use of this template, without a corresponding template to indicate these books' position in the Christian scriptures, seems POV. These books do not form a unity in most versions of the Christian Bible that I have seen. Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are joined with Ruth, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther and put right after the Pentateuch as the historical books, while the prophets+Daniel are grouped together at the prophets and put at the end of the Old Testament. The two groups are separated by the non-historical Ketuvim books (other than Daniel). Something ought to be done about this. john k 05:39, 16 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Personally (and I'm a Christian) I think the template is excellent. There are many traditions within Christianity as to what the contents and order of the Bible should be; Surprise, surprise, supporters of some of these traditions are convinced that they have the only, revealed, correct true version. But Jesus himself would have understood the Law and the Prophets in a very different way to the modern Evangelical tradition which is reflected in most versions of the Christian Bible.


 * As an encyclopedia, what we want to do is present as much information as we can in a way that is NPOV and, well, informative. I think this template does this well. If it surprises a few Christians, then they should thank us for informing them, and some even will. Andrewa 02:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, some of the evidence for the antiquity of the three-part division to Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim comes from the Christian New Testament. But that is besides the point. What is truly important is simply that there is no POV in using this template because additional templates showing the place of the books in other canons are equally welcome. You are invited to go ahead and make them! Dovi 07:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes. Well put. Andrewa 09:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Actually I just noticed (as I probably should have realized anyways) that there already is such a template: Template:Books of the Old Testament. That template does an excellent job not just of showing which books are in the various Christian canons, but also how the order of books in those various canons derives from modifications made on their basic order as found in the Septuagint. Dovi 14:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Collapsible
I have made the template collapsible. It was interacting badly with the template and jutting out into the text, resulting on page format problems. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Shape and Position
Most templates on Wikipedia are horizontal, and usually placed at the end of their articles. This one is vertical, and I found it on Book of Ezekiel, where it was tucked in at the top, next to an infobox, and made the header hopelessly cluttered. I think this should be modified to the standard format and moved to the bottom on ALL the relevant pages. Any comment? If no objections are noted, I will plan to make this modification sometime next week. -- DrGaellon (talk | contribs) 19:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Groupings?
My understanding is that the Prophets are divided into two groups:


 * 1) former: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings
 * 2) latter: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, twelve minor prophets

But the template is currently structured as three groups:


 * 1) currently labelled "first"
 * 2) currently labelled "later" (one "t)
 * 3) minor prophets

Wouldn't it be better if the template was seen to be structured as two groups, rather than three?

Feline Hymnic (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I have gone ahead and made the change, modelling it on Template:Books of Ketuvim. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:36, 27 August 2014 (UTC)