Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bible atrocities


 * POV, only mentions one so-called atrocity, extensive Bible quotes. RickK 23:58, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. A discussion of of "Genocide in the Bible" might be able to pass muster, if someone wanted to write that, but "atrocity," is far too vague and value-laden a term to be functional in this context. On a side note, why on earth would you pick a passage prescribing the death penalty for heresy (a not-unheard of practice for any ancient culture) rather than one of the bits where god commands people to kill the entire population of a town or stone a child for being uppity? -- &#2325;&#2369;&#2325;&#2381;&#2325;&#2369;&#2352;&#2379;&#2357;&#2366;&#2330;|Talk&#8253; 00:05, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * It's certainly an interesting idea. I'd like to see it expanded and specified, maybe more like, instances of violence in the Bible. But as for now it can go. --Tothebarricades.tk 02:22, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, but expand and write it properly! Mark Richards 02:23, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * At minimum it would need to be renamed. -- &#2325;&#2369;&#2325;&#2381;&#2325;&#2369;&#2352;&#2379;&#2357;&#2366;&#2330;|Talk&#8253; 03:12, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - Dang, and I was hoping for a real article. Not this mess.  Kill it and allow the bits of the old article to soak nutrients into the soil for a new article to bloom come next spring. -  T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  03:25, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Such an interesting title and those were the only examples? Several more interesting ones come to mind.  Oh, well.  If someone wants to rename it and work on it, then keep.  If it remains in current form, delete.  SWAdair | Talk  04:24, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm the original "author", so my opinion is biased :-). Anyway, I think that for an article like this, it is a reasonable approach to just quote the bible with only some very minor analysis. The idea is to let the Bible speak for itself. An alternative style would be to provide extensive hyperlinking to some (external?) bible source.  Would linking (rather than direct quoting) be better?..I agree that there are  more spectacular examples of atrocities in Bible.. Still I think that urging to kill one's son or daughter for herecy is well within "Bible atrocities" topic..And I did expect that many more examples would be added..
 * Our problem with it is that it doesn't really seem to be an encyclopedia article per se. If it's a "list of biblical atrocities", well, having such an article is POV, and if it's an article, then it doesn't pass muster for lack of content.  Some of this might be applicable at problem of evil.  Meelar 05:14, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, having spent some time on the academic study of religion, I have to say that "atrocity" is pretty meaningless in this context. All it can amount to is "Something that offends modern moral sensibilities," and that's just a given when dealing with classical materials. Something like "Genocide in the Old Testament" (all my favorite "atrocities" would fit here) or "Violence in the Bible" (you could cram a lot of other stuff in this) would have some coherent meaning with practical reference, and I would support such a page. And of course, "atrocity" is clearly POV, passing a value judgment on ancient civilizations and making an implicit judgment on certain modern inheritors of those traditions. But in any case, wikipedia articles are, as has been pointed, not intended to be mere aggregations of source material that "speak for themselves". And BTW, in my experience when people say something "speaks for itself," it's often a way of hiding behind superficial shock value to avoid getting into the nitty-gritty complexity, ambiguity, and problematicity that are the marks of reality. The page clearly betrays a juvenile and shallow approach to the study of historical religion that is lamentable. This is an interesting and rich subject that deserves to be taken seriously. -- &#2325;&#2369;&#2325;&#2381;&#2325;&#2369;&#2352;&#2379;&#2357;&#2366;&#2330;|Talk&#8253; 07:48, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. The Bible isn't a person and can't form the intent to incite someone to murder as this article implies. Blatant POV. If someone wants to discuss specific issues of apostasy or Imperialism in the Bible there are other articles for this. See Documentary hypothesis. Fire Star 14:30, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * I do not understand the last comment. The article does not imply anything: it gives examples of the Bible prescribing to murder under numerous circumstances. And I don't see any significant relationship with either apostasy ot Imperialism topics.
 * My comment about the Bible not being a person was based on this line (no longer in the article): "There are many places in Bible where it urges believers to commit attrocities or where biblical heroes or even God himself commit attrocites." The rewrite is a big improvement, and I will contribute a bit to the article over time. Fire Star 19:25, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)"
 * Comment. The article was completely rewriten on 6/11/04. Some of the concerns above were adressed (many more examples, less quoting, and, I think, better organized and less POVish).
 * Keep rewritten article if and only if the article is renamed. -Sean Curtin 02:46, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)