User talk:MithrandirAgain/Archive 2

Jesus and Messianic Prophecy
Hey, you removed my addition to this section. I don't get it. You were vague, and mentioned how you didn't like my use of the word "retort". I wasn't trying to instigate some sort of battle between Jews and Christians or something, I was just reporting what the Christian counterargument is to certain Jewish opinions about Jesus (and note- I had referenced Bible passages). It is true- the Bible contains no time-line or deadline for the prophecies to work with. (If there is one then why don't you cite your source?) And the New Testament does give reasons as to why Jesus hasn't fulfilled certain prophecies, and talks about how he'll get to them later (eg, he will usher in the Messianic era of peace/God's kingdom after the apocalypse, as detailed in Revelation).

What really bugs me is how you allow, and even restored, false claims about Christianity on this page. There is a line that says, "Contrary to the Christian belief that the Kingdom of God is not worldly...". I deleted it and explained how all the gospels, several epistles and the book of Revelation talk about how the coming kingdom of God IS going to be a literal physical thing on earth after a physical resurrection of the dead. I even put a reference (revelation 19-22)- this unambiguously spells out these points. 99% of all Christian denominations believe this.
 * Hello! Indeed, you are right on one aspect: I should have made myself more clear. It looks like you have done a lot of research on this subject, and I admire you for that. Unfortunately, Wikipedia cannot accept original research, no matter how logical or sensical. Although you can reference religious texts (like The Bible, Torah, etc.), your edits needed more than that. Let me quote: Christians retort that the messianic prophecies never specified a time-line for the Messiah's actions, and the New Testament, especially the Book of Revelation, detail how some of the prophecies will come to fruition later. . This is a bit vague and raises some questions. Which Christians? Where did they say that? How did they detail it? Can you reference it from a notable/semi-notable scholar? And for the second sentence: This includes Jesus ruling an earthly paradise after the apocalypse (Revelation 19-22). , although it does reference The Bible, if left alone, it sounds rather confusing. It also does not specifically reference a line from Revelation, nor does it reference which version of The Bible it quotes (King James, NIV, etc) which could mean a slight difference in the quote. As to "retort", I was not thinking in the lines of Jews versus Christians, I was more thinking in the lines of "Does this seem appropriate for Wikipedia?" and "Could someone unconciously misinterprate this into an anti-Christian feeling?" True, one of the meanings of retort is "To make a remark which reverses an argument upon its originator." But it also means "To say something sharp or witty in answer to a remark or accusation. ". Unless you do have a recorded incident of someone saying what you wrote in a witty or sharp way, it seemed inappropriate for Wikipedia. A better version might have been "argue", "defend their view", "explain, "maintain" or "reply".  I think you could perhaps rewite what you wrote so it complys more with Wikipedia's  standards. However, if you cannot include verifiable sources, then don't be surprised if someone else (not necessarily me, since I'm not on all the time) undos your edits. (Again, religious texts do count as sources, as long as you a) if your edit/article has material that could be controversial, include other reliable sources and b) include specifice references.) Thanks! :) -- MithrandirAgain   (Talk!)  02:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mithrandir's Note: Also posted on IP's talk page.


 * Hey. I don't know if this is technically where I should be posting this; sorry if it's not.


 * 1) Fine, if "retort" isn't 100% appropriate then I'll use "counter-argue"- that is the meaning I was trying to get across.


 * But I think all your other points are too strict and therefore not in keeping with Wikipedia's guidelines or encyclopedia guidelines in general.


 * 2) You said: "Christians retort that the messianic prophecies never specified a time-line for the Messiah's actions, and the New Testament, especially the Book of Revelation, detail how some of the prophecies will come to fruition later. . This is a bit vague and raises some questions. Which Christians? Where did they say that? How did they detail it? Can you reference it from a notable/semi-notable scholar?"


 * First, I can't point to a place in the Old Testament where the time-line DOESN'T exist, you know what I mean? There is no Jewish time-line so it cannot be referenced. But the New Testament does have a Christian time-line, as detailed in the Book of Revelation. Now, which Christians hold to this belief? Essentially all of them- all that have a moderate to literal interpretation of the Bible, which is essentially all. Where did Christian authors detail this belief? In the Bible! How did they detail it? They wrote it in the Bible!!! That is why I made Bible references! Which scholar can I quote? How about John the Apostle, who wrote Revelation? Is one of the founders of Christianity an acceptable source on the subject?


 * I find you taking objection to this equivalent to someone writing, "Christians believe Jesus came back from the dead, as detailed in various places, including the gospels," and then you coming around asking for scholarly sources and not accepting Bible passages and asking, "which Christians believe that?".


 * 3) You said: This includes Jesus ruling an earthly paradise after the apocalypse (Revelation 19-22)., although it does reference The Bible, if left alone, it sounds rather confusing. It also does not specifically reference a line from Revelation, nor does it reference which version of The Bible it quotes (King James, NIV, etc) which could mean a slight difference in the quote.


 * If you want many specific Bible quotes then I'll put those in, and I'll list if its KJV or whatever. But I don't think that's required as my broad citation of Rev 19-22 does clearly explain exactly what I'm talking about, including a physical kingdom on earth, a messianic age of righteousness and so on. Just because I didn't dissect it and show a specific line for each point doesn't mean they aren't there- any interested reader can easily find them by reading those chapters.


 * If I had written, "The story of Noah's Ark is in Genesis 6-9," would you have deleted my entry and said its citation is too vague? Just because I didn't give a synopsis with ten references doesn't mean it's unworthy; just look it up!


 * 4) What bothers me most is how this whole thing started when I tried to correct incorrect data on your site (the line that Christians don't believe in a physical resurrection). That line had NO references! So even if my references are vague they still trump the initial post, don't they? You can't delete my post for dubious citation then restore something with no references at all.


 * 5) I'm sure you'll disagree with me on this one, but most of all, I think that my contribution didn't need to cite ANYTHING as it is such common knowledge that Christians believe in Judgment Day, an age of peace etc. I feel like I'm in some kind of twilight zone defending this belief.


 * It's almost as bad as someone posting, "Christians don't believe Jesus was tried, executed and came back to life," then I post that they do, citing Luke 20-24, then you saying that it is too vague etc. It was pure courtesy to give the citation- it's such common knowledge that Christians believe these things!


 * But whatever- I'll repost with a several more-specific quotes. And BTW, you may think, "Whoa, this guy care WAY too much about Wikipedia (and I'm a mod)," but this is about preventing my religion from being misrepresented. (And I hate inconsistency.)99.229.76.115 (talk) 19:32,2 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, your edit had nothing (or very little) to do with who believes in what. It refered to Christians arguing that the messianic prophecies have no specified time-line for the Messiah's actions, and the New Testament, especially the Book of Revelation, detail how some of the prophecies will come to fruition later. I am not asking for a time-line, or what Christians believe in (I'm one so I ought to know :)). I'm asking for references. I am not asking for references on time-lines, Christian beliefs, or where the Christian authors detailed the belief. I'm simply asking for references on who said "Christians believe..."(what you wrote.) We cannot accept "common knowledge" on Wikipedia.
 * (A good way to think about it is that some hermit who has never been outside his home, and only knows basic knowledge like language, comes to Wikipedia and reads your edit. If he assumed that all the info on the page is completly true, he might have a smalll view of the world. Some people believe that everything in the Revelation is going to happen exactly the way it describes it. Others believe that it's an analogy, and that it won't happen the way it says it will word for word. So saying "(all) Christians" groups a very large group into a small category.)
 * Think of it this way: I am not asking for the end result (or denying it either.) I am instead asking for the process. Wikipedia can't go out and census every Christian in the world asking what their opinion on timelines in the Bible is. We have to have sources. And also, you have to remember we're talking about this edit, and not the last edit. That last edit has a  tag there. That is saying "The preceding information may or may not be true." I didn't put a citation needed on your edit because I felt that not doing so would serve the purpose of Wikipedia better. Think of it this way: it would look better for Christianity if there were sources, since the Judaism line also has no sources. If the Christianity line has no sources as well, it looks bad for both.
 * The thing to think about is what to do now. I don't think the current version needs much revision (except references, of course.) A good version might be:
 * Some Christians (citation) argue that the messianic prophecies never specified a time-line for the Messiah's actions, and the New Testament, especially the Book of Revelation, detail how some of the prophecies will come to fruition later. (citation) This includes Jesus ruling an earthly paradise after the apocalypse(Revelation 21:1)&(citation)
 * Of course, this is just an example. If you can think of a better version, I am sure Wikipedia would be glad to accept it. But please remember, I am not asking for belief. Just sources. Thanks! -- MithrandirAgain  (Talk!)  08:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mithrandir's Note: Also posted on IP's talk page.

Adoption
Hi MithrandirAgain, I am Skater and I've been on Wikipedia for a year or so. I would like to offer to adopt you if your up for it. Regards,-- SKATER  Speak. 13:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Skater! If you want, I would definitely be up for adoption. Thanks! :) -- MithrandirAgain   (Talk!)  22:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mithrandir's Note: Also posted on Skater's page.
 * Cool, a bit more about me:


 * 1) I've been active for a bit over a year with sporadic breaks due to multiple causes.
 * 2) I'm not a very strong article writer and often just create stubs, so far I have created about nine stubs
 * 3) I have 5200 edits in a variety of place, I feel I really am a jack of all trades, but a master of none.
 * 4) I have two Unsuccsesful RFA's and am currently undergoing Admin coaching myself with User:Fastily.
 * But enought about me ;), let's talk about you. What should I know to further assist you in this adoption?-- SKATER  Speak. 01:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * On Skater's talk page:
 * Thanks for adopting me! :) --MithrandirAgain (Talk!) 01:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've asked you a question on your talk page, please answer them when you get a chance :).--SKATER Speak. 23:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello! I am sorry I didn't respond. I've been running around in RL, doing things I'm behind in. Anyway, to answer your question, I am unsure how to answer. I've been using Wikipedia for years, but only last month did I start editing. There are some things I am not 100% proficient at, such as copyright laws, so I always read the Wiki-copyright page before I write anything. I usually lurk in the Recent Changes area, watching for vandals with the help of Twinkle. I am working on a Bot in spare time, and hope to have him up and running soon. Other than that, I can't think of a question or concern this second, but I am sure I'll think of something. Thanks again! :) -- MithrandirAgain (Talk!) 02:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mithrandir's Note: Also posted on Skater's talk page.

Truth and Honesty in Wikipedia RE: NOT James Spigelman
Over the last several months i have added information to the Wikipedia site for James Spigelman. Each addition has been cut although the information i posted is accurate and can be sited at http://1ftup.blogspot.com

From my own experiences and talking to others i can say Chief justice James J Spigelman is a corrupt judge. Chief justice Spigelman has used his judicial and political power to protect murderers, assist fraudsters and assist government departments including the Australian Defence and various intelligence departments avoid and escape scrutiny. Please look at Corrupt Judges Australia at http://1ftup.blogspot.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.20.14.4 (talk) 04:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello! Unfortunately, Wikipedia cannot accept the random opinions of someone nor can it accept the opinion of a blog. You have now reverted more of the | article and it has been undone. I strongly suggest you read Wikipedia's guide to neutrality. Thanks! -- MithrandirAgain (Talk!) 07:26, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Attention
Mind your own business, guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.34.248.159 (talk) 05:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you shouldn't vandalise, and I wouldn't have to revert your edits. -- MithrandirAgain (Talk!) 05:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:
 * Rollback gives you access to certain tools, including Huggle, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
 * Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
 * Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
 * Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
 * Please read Help:Reverting and Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
 * You can test Rollback at New admin school/Rollback
 * You may wish to display the User wikipedia/rollback userbox and/or the Rollback top icon on your user page
 * If you have any questions, please do let me know.

-- HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   14:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! -- MithrandirAgain (Talk!) 22:36, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Transcendental Meditation movement
You previously edited WikiProject Council/Proposals/Transcendental Meditation movement. A WikiProject for the topic has since been created, at WP:TMMOVEMENT. Feel free to list yourself as a participant there. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)