From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
Important notice: The article title reflects the consensus among editors here and has been discussed several times since. Before starting another discussion on this topic, please carefully read through the archives to see if your concern has already been addressed. |
|
This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects.
Click [show] for further details |
|
|
This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia.
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.
|
| Start |
This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
[edit] Move the biblical interpretation to a religion Wiki
The paragraph in the Section "Judaism and Christianity", which discusses the literal authority to the creation myth there, should be moved to "Creation (theology)" or so. Reasons:
- None of the other creation myths is followed by an indication that, or a discussion if, people do not take the story literally
- The Wiki is about "stories of how the world or a culture" began. It is a list of stories. A discussion if any religious people take the story literally belongs to the relevant religion Wiki.
- It is an interpretation of a story. I propose to just put the stories here.
Stutters (talk) 14:25, 11 June 2008
- "None of the other creation myths is followed by an indication that, or a discussion if, people do not take the story literally". There is no requirement for exactly the same information to be provided for every myth.
- "A discussion if any religious people take the story literally belongs to the relevant religion Wiki". This is a better argument. I do think, though, that attitudes towards the myths are within the purview of the article.
- The sentence on whether the myth is taken literally should be either removed or retained. It shouldn't be adorned with a "but this is true for lots of myths" sentence. Ilkali (talk) 15:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree on the adornment, that was pov. It all just made the impression on me that it was thought that the other stories were to be taken literally, which is a bit silly of course. well, just leave it
Stutters (talk) 16:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
