| Revision as of 11:19, 14 December 2005 editGrutter (talk | contribs)1,729 edits Edits to 1 Corinthians← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:10, 17 December 2005 edit undoHaiduc (talk | contribs)15,071 edits Arbitrary and biased revertsNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| There were originally three paragraphs in the Controversy over Biblical terminology section. The first paragraph dealt with the translation of "arsenokoitēs". The two versions are similar, but the one from H&C was not referenced. The second paragraph dealt with the Church Fathers and contains the same information, but I have rewritten it slightly for style and added some links. The third paragraph dealt with the translation of "lo tishkav" from Leviticus, which is already covered in the Leviticus section. Anon, could you please explain exactly what you prefer about the version from H&C and then perhaps we can work out a solution to this please. Thanks! --] 11:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | There were originally three paragraphs in the Controversy over Biblical terminology section. The first paragraph dealt with the translation of "arsenokoitēs". The two versions are similar, but the one from H&C was not referenced. The second paragraph dealt with the Church Fathers and contains the same information, but I have rewritten it slightly for style and added some links. The third paragraph dealt with the translation of "lo tishkav" from Leviticus, which is already covered in the Leviticus section. Anon, could you please explain exactly what you prefer about the version from H&C and then perhaps we can work out a solution to this please. Thanks! --] 11:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == Arbitrary and biased reverts == | |||
| I am sorry to see that this page seems to have fallen under the control of a group of anons who strong-arm a distorted presentation of the topic. ] 00:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:10, 17 December 2005
Cleanup and references
I've archived the previous talk page having finished cleaning up the page, as I think that most of the previous discussions aren't releveant any more. Apologies if I moved something by mistake that still needs to be addressed.
I've added references to each of the sections and given arguments for different interpretations of each of the passages and so have removed the totallydisputed tag. When people add more information please provide a reference for it! This is a contentious subject and I think one of the main reasons the page got the totallydisputed tag placed on it was that references weren't given and people were adding their own original research.
I've also removed a short section on 1 Peter which you can see here, as it wasn't referenced and I couldn't find anyone using it in any of the arguments about homosexuality. --G Rutter 09:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- Great work, this article had been in an awful state for a long time. - SimonP 15:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Edits to 1 Corinthians
I moved some information from Homosexuality and Christianity to 1 Corinthians, as I thought it was more appropriate here. I integrated it and checked it with what was already here and the only paragraph that I felt needed to be added was on the Church Fathers. However, an anon editor feels that I have deleted information, so I hope that we can discuss it here, rather than get into a revert war. Compare my original insertation here and the anon's addition/over-writing of the section here.
There were originally three paragraphs in the Controversy over Biblical terminology section. The first paragraph dealt with the translation of "arsenokoitēs". The two versions are similar, but the one from H&C was not referenced. The second paragraph dealt with the Church Fathers and contains the same information, but I have rewritten it slightly for style and added some links. The third paragraph dealt with the translation of "lo tishkav" from Leviticus, which is already covered in the Leviticus section. Anon, could you please explain exactly what you prefer about the version from H&C and then perhaps we can work out a solution to this please. Thanks! --G Rutter 11:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Arbitrary and biased reverts
I am sorry to see that this page seems to have fallen under the control of a group of anons who strong-arm a distorted presentation of the topic. Haiduc 00:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)