Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:56, 10 September 2013

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Religion High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Christianity Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Judaism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Islam Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Bahá'í Faith Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bahá'í Faith, a coordinated attempt to increase the quality and quantity of information about the Baháʼí Faith on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Misplaced Pages visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.Bahá'í FaithWikipedia:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithTemplate:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithBahá'í Faith Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ancient Near East Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Abrahamic religions article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Abrahamic religions article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 3 months

"Islam considers Christianity to be variously polytheistic or idolatrous."

It sounds almost is if "Islam" is a person that thinks this. Can it be improved to prevent misunderstandings? Logictheo (talk) 11:52, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

order of each section varies

While reading this article, I noticed that depending on the section it varied between Islam/Judaism/Christian and Islam/Christian/Judaism. For the sake of neatness and uniformity, I suggest we re-organize each to be alphabetical(neutral order so as not to lend "bias" towards any), thus ordering each section Christian/Islam/Judaism. 24.187.19.109 (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Zoroastrianism

There's no mention of Zoroastrianism,the religion which basically laid out almost all the tenets of the Abrahamic religions. --MightySaiyan (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

That's more or less because although it served as a basis for Abraham, it does clearly precede Abraham, and on that basis at best dubiously qualifies as being a religion which is itself springs out of Abraham's beliefs. John Carter (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Main Abrahamic Religions vs Secondary ones

there are 3 well-known main Abrahamic religions ( Judaism, Christianity and Islam ), bye some factors like number of followers, oldness and historical precedence, clear history, have a Holy book, similar Jurisprudence, Widespread acceptance by other religions, geographical origin, being official in some countries and .... there are also a dozen of secondary Abrahamic Religion which don't have most of above factors. like Mormonism, Zoroastrianism, Bahai's, Sabians and ... first I don't want to judge about which one is right or wrong, but I think the level of their importance in today's world is not the same. the others should be mention in "other Abrahamic faith" list not in the main list. --Wiki hamze (talk) 13:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Extensive discussion has happened at times - some have pushed for excluding the smaller religions because they were not mentioned by mainstream sources that look back centuries and more for their information. Other sources that were more accepting of recent developments openly listed other religions - most especially the Baha'i Faith but sometimes others - as well as critiquing attempts to limit the category to the three - and that though others were mentioned they were far more obscure but deserved some minimal mention. The general pattern of the "big three" mentioned in parallel through the article, the Baha'i Faith mentioned in the lead briefly and having a separate section specifically on the Baha'i Faith specifically down the page and then a more summary brief section on the less acknowledged religions would be the right balance. Since then the main article has lengthened considerably. If necessary we can go through the references on the relative importance of the Baha'i Faith or other religions again. I'd invite people to review related articles for references. For a sense of the history of the effort at compromise see talk histories for contributions in 2010. --Smkolins (talk) 19:14, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

For the statistical summary of the Baha'i Faith see Bahá'í_Faith#Demographics you will see third party sources rank the Baha'is above the number of Jews in either Israel or the US (compare the demographic info with Jewish population by country) and sometimes the second largest religion in some countries and if you review Bahá'í Faith by continent for some of the details behind the statistics as well as Persecution of Bahá'ís, Statements about the persecution of Bahá'ís, Political accusations against the Baha'i Faith, you can see further instances of when the religion was the object of significant coverage. None of this to put aside the relatively minor numbers of Baha'is in absolute terms but also to distinguish their number and presence around the world clearly distinguishable from that of more obscure religions. --Smkolins (talk) 19:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Mormonism is generally counted as a sub-unit of Christianity, and on that basis probably doesn't deserve special mention. Baha'is are counted as separate from Islam, so they reasonable can be included. Zoroastrianism more or less predated or is independent of Abraham, and on that basis probably doesn't qualify as "Abrahamic". No one actually seems to know who the Sabians even were, or if they were in fact a single group, which makes identifying them as Abrahamic problematic. So, honestly, although I haven't checked all the reference sources, the page as it stands looks to me fairly reasonable and balanced. John Carter (talk) 19:46, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Agreed in general adding that aside from the Baha'is the most common "Abrahamic" label I had found in previous research were the Druze though they are fewer in number and geographically largely limited for their larger populations. --Smkolins (talk) 19:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

first I didn't want to judge about existence, rightness or being fake of any religion. I just wanted to suggest a better organization and more clear Tree of religions. there are some region like "Sabians" ( I know they live atleast in Iran and I have met some of them. They themselves say that they follow prophet Yahha(John) ). according to their claim they are apparently Abrahamic. I am not specialist but I just guess there are a couple of others with small population. we can't list them under a huge parallel tree. according to importance I think first big one should be listed and others are placed in "other Abrahamic Religions". Bahai's is new religion. it has significant Jurisprudence differences with other abrahamic religions. I strongly believe that trying to put their name among outstanding Abrahimic religions is intentional acts which I see it has been done in many[REDACTED] pages by their supporters. it may be a political ill-minded acts also.--Wiki hamze (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

"We had a talk" is not justification for action yet. There are significant differences between all the Abrahamic religions - why do you think they have killed each other over the years? I've no problem with sabians being in the article if reliable sources can be found to support them. Obviously as they are obscure they would be in that section. As for the prominence of the Baha'is as I say there was already an agreement it deserved more status in the article than peoples like the sabians but not as much position as the "big three". But you are not acting in concert with the group opinion not least when you make accusations of "political ill-minded acts". --Smkolins (talk) 10:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• Moreover embarking on a campaign to curtail the presence of the religion in articles needs to be judged on a per article basis and justifying things in a brief discussion in one place hardly warrants taking steps widely in wikipedia. Such an adventure seems out of bounds to me. --Smkolins (talk) 11:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I think you are biased toward Bahai's faith because you are a member of Bahai's Faith ( I saw your page ). I don't deny Bahai's faith but placing it among top three and dominant ( by many factores which has been mentioned beforehand in this talk ) is not acceptable. this is you that should present an acceptable argument about this. Considering Bahai's faith as a secondary but abrahamic faith like Mormonism,sabians and many others is more reasonable. I think nobody disagree for placing Judaism as an important Abrahamic religion because it is so old and back-bone of other religions. Christianity and Islam has also huge number of followers and are enough old. what about others like Bahai's? Bahai's is a new faith with few followers ( refer to circular diagram in article page for number of followers ) why it should be place at that much importance as you say? why not Mormons? I invite others to participate in this talk.--Wiki hamze (talk) 12:29, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

embarking on a campaign of character assassination against editors is not appropriate. wikipedia:assume good faith. As I said there was extensive discussion in 2010 by many contributors and the current general pattern is what was agreed to then. The Baha'i Faith is certainly newer than the other religions but calling it "new" is a misnomer since it is well over a century old and has been mentioned, the Baha'i Faith is clearly and distinguishably more prominent than more obscure groups - both in the literature of Abrahamic research and in general. At over 7 million the Baha'is are clearly smaller than Judaism as a whole though larger than either of its two main populations and far larger than the hundreds of thousands for several of the lesser known religions which are also relatively localized. Beyond that you have mischaracterized the discussion so far and taken it as license to start making changes in other articles. This is not balanced appropriate development of making[REDACTED] better. This is having an agenda. By all means lets have more people involved in the discussion. --Smkolins (talk) 12:47, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

please let us avoid an wikipedia:edit war.If you are the same user who made this edit then note carefully you have been reverted by three different editors. --Smkolins (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

first please notice it is not about accepting or denying Bahai's faith. I don't deny it. anyway it exists, like Mormonism, Sabians(as I see them and live with them in my town) and many others. my talk is about why you place Bahai's among 4 top Abrahamic Religions, as I see your try to prohibit changing the pictures? by which factor you think it is this much important? ( why not mormons? why not Sabians? please answer ). Judaism has huge history, huge number of prophets, its has undeniable historical importance. it is back-bone religion for others. which outstanding factor does Bahai's faith has which you place them in same level as three others?--Wiki hamze (talk) 13:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

the other user who reverted back your changes is not me. I am waiting for your arguments --Wiki hamze (talk) 13:17, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

you are misdirecting or misunderstanding. You reverted me here as the last edit of this moment. The other editor changed an unrelated aspect of the article. --Smkolins (talk) 15:07, 9 September 2013 (UTC) You have been reverted by several different editors at , , and . You keep insisting the presence of the religion needs to be justified when in fact that was the consensus going back years. I do not want to participate in an edit war. I believe you have failed the Misplaced Pages:Edit_war#The_three-revert_rule and different editors on this page and other pages have noted your behavior. --Smkolins (talk) 15:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Dear Smkolins, I am awaiting to hear your argument to see why you think there are 4 and not 3. I have searched for awhile in internet. I think majority of people in internet believe there are three outstanding Abrahimic religions( of course beside some minor others). you can see for example this link or this link. I don't know why but obviously you are trying to place Bahai's faith in a place that obviously it shouldn't be. many people also believes that it is a branch of Islam like John Carter in above writings, you can make a picture of others Abrahamic symbols like Bahai's & Mormonism & ..., and put it beside the first picture, then I will agree with you. but not as a same level of those three.--Wiki hamze (talk) 16:05, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Aside from questions of behavior and trying to switch the argument - issues I still think important as you seem bent on examining the question from a view towards political motives - just limiting myself in google scholar for abrahamic & baha'i to "since 2012" and entries not behind pay-walls (and not including citations and patents):

• Embracing Epistemic Humility: Confronting Triumphalism in Three Abrahamic Religions (intro)
• Ethics and the Golden Rule (mentioned third under "other" but the longest section)
• Baha'i Religious History
• Primary Abrahamic faiths
• Pilgrimage--The Sacred Art: Journey to the Center of the Heart
• The Big Book of Reincarnation: Examining the Evidence that We Have All Lived …

(overall 87 results)

abrahamic & Druze (48 results)

abrahamic & sabean (8 results)

I don't disagree the Baha'i Faith is not habitually included in a list of Abrahamic religions - which is why the compromise was towards not keeping it in parallel with the other big three was arrived at. But it is far more often mentioned as an additional Abrahamic religion than other combinations and is of itself significantly larger, more widespread, and growing, than the other more obscure Abrahamic religions. Including it only in such a list is a disservice to the fact of how abrahamic coverage actually exists in publication.--Smkolins (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• • please note I am not using the references to make other points - just that there are in fact reasonable numbers of cases where the Baha'i Faith is included in a list of Abrahamic religions and if you will do the searches as I have described them you will see the results as well. --Smkolins (talk) 17:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I have heard that bahaies have not any pray or fast like other faiths. it established by an muslim clergy. so it could not be a separate abrahamic religion. --Hagarblue (talk) 17:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hagarblue you are sadly deeply misinformed. Please take the time to review the Bahá'í Faith. Prayer and fasting are core practices and your mention of muslim clergy is painful widely in error. See Persecution of Bahá'ís. The Baha'i Faith is a well established world wide religion acknowledged by non-Baha'i sources as being the fastest growing religion over a century of history and the second most widespread religion on the planet. Please please please read more. Check sources all you want. --Smkolins (talk) 18:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I repeat again I didn't claim that Bahai's is not a Abrahamic Religion. I do understand your respect to your beliefs. I just wanted to say that there is a huge, really huge, difference between first three one and others. not only because of number of followers but also because of long and valuable history behind them. I don't know, maybe Bahai is most growing secondary Abrahamic faith ( as you say) but there is still long long time needed to include it among those 3 one. at least they should have 5 percentage of world population or a couple of centuries in their history. I tried to explain my reasons and I hope accept I am not ill-minded toward your beliefs. if you put Bahai's name as a secondary abrahamic religion, I will not disagree. best regards--Wiki hamze (talk) 18:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

And you have not gotten anyone to agree with your editorial approach. Instead editors have reverted you, not just me, and you have convinced no one. --Smkolins (talk) 18:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

if you read only this page from start to end, you will see I have convinced some guys. it seems their knowledge is vaster than me.--Wiki hamze (talk) 18:16, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

nope - I don't see anyone but yourself. While I'm at it more citations:

more

• “The Journey of Abraham” Event is Part of Library’s Stories of Faith Program
• What Is Comparative Religion?
• ‘Go Forth From Your Country’
• Integrating Spirituality in Health and Social Care: Perspectives and Practical Approaches
• Prayers of Prophets, Knights and Kings: A Symposium from 2334 B. C to Date
• International Tourism: Cultures and Behavior*Wondering Man, Money & Go(l)d
• The Old Religion
• Sodomy: A History of a Christian Biblical Myth
• Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Religion: A-F
• Nonviolent Perspectives Within the Abrahamic Religions
• crossfaithministry.org
• Is Satanism "Abrahamic"?
• Quizzes - Judaism
• Library of Congress Subject Headings
• Christianity: Details about 'Abrahamic Religion'
• worldmapper.org (Abrahamic on in red)
• Fils d'Abraham (series) - an encyclopedia in 31 volumes entitled the "Sons of Abraham"(trans.). The Baha'i volume is itself 202 pages and there are other significant small religions that each have their own volume. They are in French. A 32nd volume is mentioned in A bibliography Fils d’Abraham. Panorama des communautés juives, chrétiennes et musulmanes which is the summary volume introducing the whole series - is partially viewable The published bibliography says the pages mentioning the religion are 11, 47-51.
• Ethnomedicine

-- again I am not calling for special treatment. Baha'is are regularly mentioned as Abrahamic and far more than others. Not on an equal footing with the other religions but previous exchanges exactly like this have come to see a useful balance at the point the article largely was. You are the one coming in insisting on changes without evidence. I'm showing evidence, as well as noting your reverting over and over again. --Smkolins (talk) 18:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

And Wiki hamze your edits to other articles trying to justify your approach was reverted by other editors. Here and elsewhere your approach is constantly running against the grain. See and .

I live in iran which is also origin of bahaie.......is your prophet mirza hosein ali noori?? now you say he is not moslim?? and is it his photo?http://www.e-heyat.com/UploadFiles/Nama/shakhsiyatedakheli/bahayiat.jpg so he is an iranian muslim clergy who want to have new religion ... so he establish it about 100 years ago!. I have read many books about your religion. and I have some friend that they are bahaie. so I know enough about bahaie... I read a book by fazl sobhi mohtadi who is person that write aghdas with baha. he was closest person to baha.I have not any problem with your belifs but i am sure that bahaie have been born from eslam so you can not be a separate abrahamic religion. please dont want to teach me about your faith. and read more and more and more.--Hagarblue (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Then read what your own countrymen have said - http://books.google.com/books?id=J5RGlpx0j8sC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA52#v=onepage&q&f=false --Smkolins (talk) 20:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

dear Smkolins, Let's to start anew. I make my question clear and you answer it clear, OK?is your religion abrahamic? you say yes, I say yes. so where is the problem? is your religion independent abrahamic faith and not a branch of Islam? you probably say yes, and I definetly say yes, because all Muslims strongly deny you. so still I can't find any problem here.is your faith as importance as "big other three"? I say no, there are huge differences and I've presented my argumetns. I am waiting to read your concise and clear arguments that why you put yourself among those? are you that much historic or have that much of followers? you are growing? this is your claim, so why can't you just wait until you have 5 percentage of earth population?--Wiki hamze (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

If you want to "start anew" then revert all the changes under approach you have taken. Own your mistakes. All your edits have been under one theme and several editors in several articles have reverted you. It is obvious the Baha'i Faith is clearly more significant that every other small Abrahamic religion and previous consensus has supported the pattern you are seeking to change. That you refuse to see it seems willfully to ignore the references. There is no argument the Baha'i Faith isn't in par overall with the big three - there has never been any such contention and to claim you are correcting that is dishonest. You say - your own words - "I strongly believe that trying to put their name among outstanding Abrahimic religions is intentional acts which I see it has been done in many[REDACTED] pages by their supporters. it may be a political ill-minded acts also." Are you going to "start anew" with that understanding as well? The other smaller abrahamic religions are significantly smaller just as the Baha'i Faith is significantly smaller than Christianity and Islam. But the other smaller religions are also largely present in only a few places while the Baha'i Faith has been observed by non-Baha'i sources to be both growing quickly and more spread out around the world than those smaller religions many of whom are far older. Age and size are not the only determinants of significance. And though the Baha'is are small they are larger than either major center of Judaism population - and that measurement itself still larger than the other smaller Abrahamic religions. --Smkolins (talk) 21:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I guess you even didn't read my writings! because you are repeating something about Judaism while I gave you the answer multiple time. JUDAISM IS AN ANCIENT, OLD, BACK-BONE RELIGION WHICH MUSLIMS AND CHRISTIANS APPROVE THEM, is it clear now? what is your outstanding characteristic? ha? all other three believe that you are a fake religion. you are not comparable with those three. If you want to feel important it is better to find another way, changing the reality is not the way. your action confirm my claim about "ill-minded political acts". you are a newborn and tiny religion. how can you dare to put yourself at that level? instead of referring me to other users, who are probably your friends or yourself!, please give me ARGUMENTS, I see you are avoiding this part. well well well, another matter, I am reading something about dark-side of your religion which you usually don't point it, it seem that you have no problem with gay-marriage and even brother-sister marriage. when I mean no problem, I mean you don't make it illegal so they are free to enter your religion happily. it is a good way to attract many people! you remove the hard part of religions :) while pretending to be so ethical. is this in compliant with Abrahamic religions? you yourself said something about "different habits" of Baha'i

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class Religion articles
• High-importance Religion articles
• WikiProject Religion articles
• C-Class Christianity articles
• Mid-importance Christianity articles
• WikiProject Christianity articles
• C-Class Judaism articles
• Mid-importance Judaism articles
• C-Class Islam-related articles
• Mid-importance Islam-related articles
• WikiProject Islam articles
• C-Class Bahá'í Faith articles
• Mid-importance Bahá'í Faith articles
• WikiProject Bahá'í Faith articles
• C-Class Ancient Near East articles
• Mid-importance Ancient Near East articles
• Ancient Near East articles by assessment