589:
cultural vocabulary (E). Further, it is not doctrine-defining even in the modern
Pentecostal movement - which instead focuses on places like 1 Corinthians 12 and 14. "It means a lot" is not the same thing as encyclopedic notability - that is, "it means a lot" is a subjective value statement. As I noted above, it "means a lot" to me as well. But in neither of the traditions in question is it a doctrine-defining, or church-defining, verse.
213:
1) I can't believe we'd want to jump on the slippery slope of an article on every single verse of the bible that someone decides is notable. 2) the article is inherently POV simply because it seems based on one (and only one) english-language translation of the verse. 3) Redundancy: the passage is
588:
Actually, that has nothing to do with it. The use of
Scripture in theological development from 33-1517 has nothing to do with whether or not I am Lutheran (A & B above). Since then, it still is not a topic of debate among modern biblical scholars (C above). It is not a part of the broader
503:
Pastor David, since your a pastor you should know this is one of the most well-quoted verses in the Bible and one of the most well known. event though it doesn't have much information to the article. It still deserves it's own page exactly like
369:
Unfortunately there is not enough information on this verse yet, if enough can be gathered in the future, this verse is notable enough, in my opinion, to warrant its own article, but, for now, there is not enough content.
270:
Yeah, I'm a little curious about this also. In my opinion, the article is not a recreation, and in the future, if sources are discovered to justify notability, I do not want its creation precluded. Why salt?
529:
While I do not care to get into an extensive debate here, let me say that I respectfully disagree. (A) It was not ever a lynch-pin verse in the early theological debates of the church, such as
115:
567:
The difference between me and you, Pastor David, is that your
Luthuren (or however you spell it) and I'm Pentecostal. It mean a whole lot more in my church.--
412:
there is significant written commentary on every verse of the bible, and perhaps someone will do these articles on some of the key verses properly. .
549:. I am glad that you find it personally meaningful, as do I. However, devotional value is not the same thing as encyclopedic notability.
88:
83:
558:Δοξα σοι ο Θεος! it's nice to see a pastor capable of a reasoned, encyclopedic approach to the Bible. Kudos to you, Pastor David. :-) --
381:
92:
75:
17:
394:
per
Markeer. Additionally, no reliable sources with significant coverage prove the individual notability of this passage.
491:
494:. Does not have an extensive history of notability, as some individual passages/verses of the New Testament do.
730:
36:
729:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
716:
674:
650:
629:
618:
593:
583:
562:
553:
524:
498:
480:
459:
447:
423:
400:
386:
361:
349:
337:
321:
287:
275:
257:
230:
218:
205:
182:
147:
130:
57:
710:
or which are not generally known as independent and reliable are not acceptable verifications of notability.
376:
644:
612:
577:
518:
474:
441:
241:
79:
284:
227:
126:
its particular "epistle" To clarifiy, I'm not seeing notability for this particular verse on its own.
636:
604:
569:
510:
466:
433:
538:
346:
272:
127:
52:
431::but if it must be deleted I agree with what's said above ("recreate when enough information").--
371:
623:
Unfortunately, there is not a shred of reliable, independent evidence to suggest that provided.
456:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
671:
590:
550:
542:
534:
495:
318:
179:
140:
71:
63:
333:(Targeman 24:7). Send this article to Hell and mercifully burn its author at the stake. --
299:
49:
711:
707:
624:
559:
419:
395:
334:
280:
201:
703:
358:
215:
196:
109:
699:
656:
303:
191:
164:
546:
505:
156:
545:; (D) nor does it have a secure place in our cultural vernacular, such as
530:
414:
698:(unindent) Notability is not hear-say or opinion, it is something to be
600:
IT'S NOTABLE, BECAUSE IT'S ONE OF THE MOST QUOTED VERSES IN THE BIBLE.
541:; (C) it has not been the object of modern scholarly debate, such as
214:
listed on the main
Phillipians article as a notable verse already -
723:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
655:
Hornetman - step back and chill out for a moment. Please. -
537:; (B) it was never a doctrine-defining verse, such as the
105:
101:
97:
634:
What the heck does indepenence have to do with it?--
345:Do we need an article on every verse of the Bible?
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
139:Not notable in and of itself as a single passage.
733:). No further edits should be made to this page.
122:Not sure how this particular writing is notable
357:per above. No cites since the 4th C. A.D.?
8:
455:per Rackabello, Knowledge is not the bible.
464:No but we do Document the notable verses.--
7:
24:
331:Thou shalt not commit biblecruft
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
704:reliable, independent sources
598:I'll say it this last time.
155:- compare and contrast with
750:
492:Epistle to the Philippians
717:21:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
675:21:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
651:21:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
630:21:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
619:21:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
594:20:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
584:20:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
563:16:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
554:16:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
525:03:34, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
499:21:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
481:20:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
460:09:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
448:18:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
424:05:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
401:22:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
387:17:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
362:16:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
350:15:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
338:13:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
322:20:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
288:08:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
276:19:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
258:18:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
231:12:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
219:12:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
206:07:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
183:06:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
148:06:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
131:06:02, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
58:03:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
726:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
706:. Sources with a clear
410:certainly do not salt
194:passage in itself. --
708:conflict of interest
539:Words of Institution
163:notable in itself -
298:There's no need to
283:should be enough.
190:This is clearly a
741:
728:
714:
669:
666:
664:
647:
643:
639:
627:
615:
611:
607:
580:
576:
572:
543:1 Corinthians 11
535:Great Commission
521:
517:
513:
477:
473:
469:
444:
440:
436:
398:
384:
379:
374:
316:
313:
311:
256:
254:
251:
247:
244:
239:
226:as bible-cruft.
204:
199:
177:
174:
172:
144:
113:
95:
72:Philippians 4:13
64:Philippians 4:13
55:
34:
749:
748:
744:
743:
742:
740:
739:
738:
737:
731:deletion review
724:
712:
662:
660:
657:
645:
641:
637:
625:
613:
609:
605:
578:
574:
570:
519:
515:
511:
475:
471:
467:
442:
438:
434:
396:
382:
377:
372:
309:
307:
304:
302:this article -
252:
249:
245:
242:
237:
236:
224:Delete and salt
197:
195:
170:
168:
165:
142:
86:
70:
67:
53:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
747:
745:
736:
735:
696:
695:
694:
693:
692:
691:
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
485:
484:
483:
450:
426:
403:
389:
364:
352:
340:
327:
326:
325:
324:
295:
294:
293:
292:
291:
290:
263:
262:
261:
260:
221:
208:
185:
150:
120:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
746:
734:
732:
727:
721:
720:
719:
718:
715:
709:
705:
701:
676:
673:
670:
668:
654:
653:
652:
649:
648:
640:
633:
632:
631:
628:
622:
621:
620:
617:
616:
608:
601:
597:
596:
595:
592:
587:
586:
585:
582:
581:
573:
566:
565:
564:
561:
557:
556:
555:
552:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
527:
526:
523:
522:
514:
507:
502:
501:
500:
497:
493:
489:
486:
482:
479:
478:
470:
463:
462:
461:
458:
454:
451:
449:
446:
445:
437:
430:
427:
425:
421:
417:
416:
411:
407:
404:
402:
399:
393:
390:
388:
385:
380:
375:
368:
365:
363:
360:
356:
353:
351:
348:
344:
341:
339:
336:
332:
329:
328:
323:
320:
317:
315:
301:
297:
296:
289:
286:
282:
281:Philippians 4
279:
278:
277:
274:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
264:
259:
255:
248:
234:
233:
232:
229:
225:
222:
220:
217:
212:
211:Speedy Delete
209:
207:
203:
200:
193:
189:
186:
184:
181:
178:
176:
162:
158:
154:
151:
149:
146:
145:
138:
135:
134:
133:
132:
129:
125:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
56:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
725:
722:
697:
658:
635:
603:
599:
568:
509:
487:
465:
457:Darrenhusted
452:
432:
428:
413:
409:
405:
391:
366:
354:
342:
330:
305:
285:70.55.91.131
240:
228:70.55.85.148
223:
210:
187:
166:
160:
152:
141:
136:
123:
121:
45:
43:
31:
28:
591:Pastordavid
551:Pastordavid
496:Pastordavid
406:weak delete
192:non-notable
143:Wikidudeman
347:Rackabello
235:Why salt?
547:John 3:16
506:John 3:16
157:John 3:16
713:VanTucky
700:verified
626:VanTucky
560:Targeman
533:and the
531:John 1:1
488:Redirect
397:VanTucky
335:Targeman
159:, which
116:View log
508:does.--
359:Bearian
216:Markeer
202:iva1979
124:outside
89:protect
84:history
638:Hornet
606:Hornet
571:Hornet
512:Hornet
468:Hornet
453:Delete
435:Hornet
392:Delete
383:050389
367:Delete
355:Delete
343:Delete
188:Delete
153:Delete
137:Delete
93:delete
46:delete
273:Navou
128:Navou
110:views
102:watch
98:links
54:desat
16:<
429:KEEP
420:talk
408:but
373:Will
300:SALT
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
50:Core
48:. --
702:in
642:man
610:man
575:man
516:man
490:to
472:man
439:man
415:DGG
378:Mak
253:mit
250:her
114:– (
663:is
646:16
614:16
602:--
579:16
520:16
476:16
443:16
422:)
370:--
310:is
246:ki
243:Wi
171:is
161:is
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
672:☺
667:n
665:o
661:l
659:A
418:(
319:☺
314:n
312:o
308:l
306:A
238:~
198:S
180:☺
175:n
173:o
169:l
167:A
118:)
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.