This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The bulk of this article's materials seems to be a list of sources claiming Jesus either was or wasn't mentally fit, but not a lot of details into the argument. Is that something we can expand upon? What evidence or clues are these sources using? For example, Binet-Sangle is quoted as saying "the nature of the hallucinations..." leads him to the conclusion of mental affliction, but what nature is he talking about? Obviously anyone who doesn't believe in divine revelation can call it a hallucination, but I assume they offer more evidence than that. 2600:8800:23A5:5D00:6837:1C32:8B39:603 ( talk) 19:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@ MaxwellWinnie102: It is simply unknown how the twelve apostles died. See Talk:Apostles in the New Testament#Unexplained deletion. So neither claim is right: neither "they were martyred", nor "they weren't martyred". We simply don't know what happened to them. tgeorgescu ( talk) 06:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Ah I did not know that. MaxwellWinnie102 ( talk) 15:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
But still it shouldn’t say it like it’s a fact. MaxwellWinnie102 ( talk) 16:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Most of the people cited in this article belonged to psychiatry before it had matured (and it still has a lot of room for growth. However, back in the early 1900s, we were closer to lobotomizing people than we were to treating them). It'd be like an article on alchemy discussing it solely through quotes of alchemists in the 1600s without the judgment of modern science. Perhaps, the title should be "The Historical Investigation of Jesus' Sanity" with pop culture being a separate section rather than laymen books being treated as serious philosophical or scientific works. Then, there could be an article on his sanity that is reserved for authoritative, modern analysis. Alternatively, the sections could be branded: Early Conjecture, Pop Culture, and Modern Analysis. To be clear, both sections suffer similar problems other than the study at Harvard, but I do suggest, given how this article is, that someone with knowledge of psychiatry read it for everyone's sake.
To understand what I'm talking about better, one linked author couldn't be found through a Google search. One was quoted from his blog. The last to mention was labeled a "lay theologian". Many of the people just mentioned have little authority on this topic unlike how the article reads now ("Mental Health of Jesus"). We're talking about outdated conjecture from before the DSM 4 or 5 had been created. A different title like "The Historical views about Jesus' sanity" could improve things. One article would be about the historical jabs and parries while the other is about the actual best guess of Jesus' mental status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.212.102 ( talk) 05:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, to whomever has moderation authority over entire articles,
The very nature of this page is horrifically offensive and blasphemous, and it’s existence seems unusual compared to what you would see for any other religion.
I see no articles referencing the mental health of Moses, or Abraham, or Noah, or Muhammad, or Buddha. Of course, it is always Christianity that is used as the punching bag of the bitter western intellectuals.
There is absolutely no way to give a reasonable mental evaluation of a man who lived 2,000 years ago in any capacity anyways.
The only evidence cited here are verses from the New Testament, which clearly are meant to depict the priests not fully grasping the capabilities of Jesus and not understanding where his power comes from.
Besides that, Jesus displays phenomenal levels of intelligence, religious education, common sense, and speaks in powerful and easy to understand parable and metaphors throughout the Bible. Nothing he says would lead anybody to question his psychiatric state.
The only thing you could criticize would be his claim of divinity, in which case that can be applied to all and any prophets, chosen people, divine leaders, gurus, etc. And in that case an article about religious leadership itself should be established.
But here it is specifically and only against Jesus Christ in an obvious backhanded, passive aggressive attack on Christianity specifically.
Would recommend removal of the page. 2600:1700:1EF0:9E30:468:17BB:DABB:AF2E ( talk) 08:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Wikipek ( talk) 09:48, 25 December 2022 (UTC)In advance, he explained to his followers the necessity of his death as prelude for his return (Matthew 16:21–28; Mark 8:31; John 16:16–28). If this occurred in the manner described, then Jesus appears to have deliberately placed himself in circumstances wherein he anticipated his execution.
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The bulk of this article's materials seems to be a list of sources claiming Jesus either was or wasn't mentally fit, but not a lot of details into the argument. Is that something we can expand upon? What evidence or clues are these sources using? For example, Binet-Sangle is quoted as saying "the nature of the hallucinations..." leads him to the conclusion of mental affliction, but what nature is he talking about? Obviously anyone who doesn't believe in divine revelation can call it a hallucination, but I assume they offer more evidence than that. 2600:8800:23A5:5D00:6837:1C32:8B39:603 ( talk) 19:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@ MaxwellWinnie102: It is simply unknown how the twelve apostles died. See Talk:Apostles in the New Testament#Unexplained deletion. So neither claim is right: neither "they were martyred", nor "they weren't martyred". We simply don't know what happened to them. tgeorgescu ( talk) 06:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Ah I did not know that. MaxwellWinnie102 ( talk) 15:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
But still it shouldn’t say it like it’s a fact. MaxwellWinnie102 ( talk) 16:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Most of the people cited in this article belonged to psychiatry before it had matured (and it still has a lot of room for growth. However, back in the early 1900s, we were closer to lobotomizing people than we were to treating them). It'd be like an article on alchemy discussing it solely through quotes of alchemists in the 1600s without the judgment of modern science. Perhaps, the title should be "The Historical Investigation of Jesus' Sanity" with pop culture being a separate section rather than laymen books being treated as serious philosophical or scientific works. Then, there could be an article on his sanity that is reserved for authoritative, modern analysis. Alternatively, the sections could be branded: Early Conjecture, Pop Culture, and Modern Analysis. To be clear, both sections suffer similar problems other than the study at Harvard, but I do suggest, given how this article is, that someone with knowledge of psychiatry read it for everyone's sake.
To understand what I'm talking about better, one linked author couldn't be found through a Google search. One was quoted from his blog. The last to mention was labeled a "lay theologian". Many of the people just mentioned have little authority on this topic unlike how the article reads now ("Mental Health of Jesus"). We're talking about outdated conjecture from before the DSM 4 or 5 had been created. A different title like "The Historical views about Jesus' sanity" could improve things. One article would be about the historical jabs and parries while the other is about the actual best guess of Jesus' mental status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.212.102 ( talk) 05:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, to whomever has moderation authority over entire articles,
The very nature of this page is horrifically offensive and blasphemous, and it’s existence seems unusual compared to what you would see for any other religion.
I see no articles referencing the mental health of Moses, or Abraham, or Noah, or Muhammad, or Buddha. Of course, it is always Christianity that is used as the punching bag of the bitter western intellectuals.
There is absolutely no way to give a reasonable mental evaluation of a man who lived 2,000 years ago in any capacity anyways.
The only evidence cited here are verses from the New Testament, which clearly are meant to depict the priests not fully grasping the capabilities of Jesus and not understanding where his power comes from.
Besides that, Jesus displays phenomenal levels of intelligence, religious education, common sense, and speaks in powerful and easy to understand parable and metaphors throughout the Bible. Nothing he says would lead anybody to question his psychiatric state.
The only thing you could criticize would be his claim of divinity, in which case that can be applied to all and any prophets, chosen people, divine leaders, gurus, etc. And in that case an article about religious leadership itself should be established.
But here it is specifically and only against Jesus Christ in an obvious backhanded, passive aggressive attack on Christianity specifically.
Would recommend removal of the page. 2600:1700:1EF0:9E30:468:17BB:DABB:AF2E ( talk) 08:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Wikipek ( talk) 09:48, 25 December 2022 (UTC)In advance, he explained to his followers the necessity of his death as prelude for his return (Matthew 16:21–28; Mark 8:31; John 16:16–28). If this occurred in the manner described, then Jesus appears to have deliberately placed himself in circumstances wherein he anticipated his execution.