Talk:Paraclete

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity: Jesus / Theology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of the Jesus work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive. This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as High-importance). Bible High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Islam Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. 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.

The Islamic section of the article is littered with unreferenced claims and weasel words. Perhaps some knowledgable muslim could correct the text. At the very least provide references. I am too ignorant regarding the Paraclete/Mohammad debate to comment. 128.214.133.2 (talk) 10:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paraclete is the Greek term for "spirit". When translated into english it can mean any of the following: counsellor, advocate, teacher, guide, champion, helper, revealer, comforter, encourager, praiser etc.

The Greek word for "spirit" is πνεύμα (pneuma), and this is the term used in the expression "Holy Spirit." The Gospel of John speaks of "another Paraclete" (comforter or advocate) to designate the presence and action of the Holy Spirit when Jesus is no longer visibly present to his followers. Faylei (talk) 21:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paraclete is only used in the Gospel of John in verses such as 14:15-17, 14:25-26, 15:26-27, 16:1-15 etc.

Abelard says he named his oratory the Paraclete in The Letters of Abelard and Heloise in Historia calamitatum. He discusses the Holy Spirit and the Trinity in his writings. "In fact, the whole Trinity or any member of the Trinity may be addressed as Paraclete, that is, Comforter, according to the words of the Apostle:'Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the all merciful Father and the GOd whose consolation never fails us. He comforts us in all out troubles; and as the Truth says, "And he shall give you another to be your Comforter."'" (this quote cited to 2 Corinthians i, 3-4; John xvi, 16).

"the pneuma moves where He wants to and you are hearing His voice, but do not know where He comes from or where He is going." (see John chapter 3). Before he died, he told his followers that they knew the pneuma (for he had been speaking through Jesus for three years). - according to whom? I've seen no Bible translation that expresses this (NIV, KJV, NKJV, CSB or ASB.) If this phrase cannot be backed up with some kind of notation then it should be at least qualified ("according to some people") if not deleted altogether.4bigGuy9 (talk) 17:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of the references to the Arabian chap came from...? The "Jesus(PBUH)" isn't an act of vandalism then...194.46.240.65 00:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't see why there is a table of Moslem prophets at the footer of this page. If anybody has a good reason, I'm all ears. Haakondahl (talk) 09:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think someone is doing some comparative religion re-analysis and has decided that Muhammad is the paraclete that Jesus promises to send as "another comforter" in the gospel of John. This analysis is attested in other places on the internet but someone more knowledgeable in Muslim comparative religion will need to assess how widely held this interpretation is and its degree of orthodoxy. CharlusIngus (not logged in right now)

This page and Gospel of Barnabas contradict each other on what "periklutos" means -- besides which, neither one seems to be right. Periklutos means "heard of all around"; i.e. "famous" -- not "comforter" or "advocate" or "admirable one". Besides, the similarity in consonants between the two words does not imply any relation (as it would in a Semitic language such as Arabic). 71.82.214.160 06:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like paracletos (παράκλητος) is the biblical word translated to "comforter" or "advocate" (source: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/παράκλητος#Ancient_Greek), while periklutos (περικλῠτός) is "the famous" or "the excellent" (source: http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.57:8:114.LSJ). I also noticed that Google translates περικλυτος into "wraps". (?) Still, the article is using "periklytos" while the quotes use "periklutos". Why? Markuswestermoen (talk) 10:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the difference in spelling may be from the actual references and the manner those authors spelled the word (either using a "y" or "u"), but I'd have to look at the references a bit closer. I'm not sure if other editors would have issue if one spelling was to be used for the sake of conformity, but if that is how they were originally written by whoever published their work, I think it wouldn't be so much an issue of confusion or mistake, but choice in use when translating...and thus my opinion is that they should be as they were originally published. -- HafizHanif (talk) 16:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When I review the biblical links for the term Paraclete, I get nothing but a list of Bibles from which to choose. What would be better is to link to an exact translation that uses paraclete. If paraclete is not used in any translation, then linking to a bible verse is senseless. Any help?--^StormRider 22:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Paraclete is the transliteration of the original Greek. Most versions translate it into a common English word. The verses you are told about are the ones where paraclete is used in the original. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this took so long to respond and I have not checked the article again. However, the reference should link directly to a supporting reference or explanation of the statement. The current reference is useless. My understanding echos your comment above, but the reference still needs to be improved. Do you have one on hand? -^StormRider 19:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Words derived from proper nouns are capitalised, like British, Christian and Trinitarian. Also titles are capitalised: thus The Duke of Erewhon is a lord, but Jesus is Lord. Likewise the Holy Spirit is a counsellor, but he is also Counsellor. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The section "Paraclete in Islam" states "However, there is no textual evidence to support the claim, other than the fact that vowels were not used in the original greek language".

While a citation for this is given for this "fact", its absolutely wrong. The vowels in the ancient Greek alphabet are alpha, epsilon, eta, iota, omicron, upsilon, and omega.

I have added a sentence pointing out this inaccuracy. For verification I have included a link to the most prestigious Greek Grammar in English, Smyth's entry on the Greek Alphabet, where the grammmar makes clear that some of the ancient Greek letters are vowels.

An editor should review this article to figure out how to resolve this.

And we should review this article in order to understand it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vorsap (talk • contribs) 10:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The term of paraklete is not a holy spirit, because the sentence st. John's Gospel "...another paraklete..." was inappropriate to be "..another holy spirit...". With my best regards.

The above objection is invalid, e.g. "I will give you another gift, a Ferrari" is not disproven nor proven by substituting it in the phrase itself, even with only one Ferrari existing in the context. Similarly the Deedat's objection in the article is suspiciously naive, as the Holy Spirit had not descended on Apostles earlier, but of course since the guy is notable I do not advocate removing it. 151.51.218.98 (talk) 23:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Paraclete which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/P/PARACLETE/

  Triggered by \bbible\-history\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Widr, and others watching this page: is the primary source issue ( in the hope of cleaning up the article and having the primary source template removed ) found mostly in the "In Christianity" section? I can help find secondary citations for this section and others you can point out. Please reintroduce edits I've removed with proper citations. -- HafizHanif (talk) 21:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The information in the "In Christianity" section is based on secondary scholarly sources. There seems to be no justification for having the primary-source template. Bealtainemí (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help :) -- HafizHanif (talk) 15:44, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An enormous amount of this article, in the 'In Islam' section, contains swathes of unreliable information and incoherent citations. For example, it cites a book by a Muslim apologist named Ahmed Deedat -- apparently self-published -- a clear violation of WP:RS. In the earlier other part of the section, offering a citation for Ibn Ishaq being the earliest to make a certain interpretation of the Paraclete, the citation looks like this;

"Page 50 "As early as Ibn Ishaq (85-151 AH) the biographer of Muhammad, the Muslims identified the Paraclete - referred to in John's ... "to give his followers another Paraclete that may be with them forever" is none other than Muhammad.""

Well ... page 50 of WHAT? Another citation, regarding the views of contemporary Muslim writers like Martin Liggs, looks like this;

"Al-Masāq: studia arabo-islamica mediterranea: Volumes 9 à 10 ;Volume 9 University of Leeds. Dept. of Modern Arabic Studies, Taylor & Francis - 1997 "Many Muslim writers, including Ibn Hazm, al-Taban, al-Qurtubi, and Ibn Taymiyya, have identified the Paraclete with Muhammad. Probably the first to do so was his biographer Ibn Ishaq in the mid eighth century.""

The citation goes to the journal Al-Masaq, a valid journal. The problem is, of course, that despite this, the citation is still incoherent. It refers to volumes 9 and 10 of the journal. What? Citations can't refer to an entire volume of a journal, they must go to a specific paper. Thus, this reference makes zero sense. Yet another reference, for Christians substituting parkletyos, reads;

""Isa", Encyclopedia of Islam"

The encyclopedia of Islam? Which volume? What pages? This one is at least fixable -- since the Encyclopedia of Islam was written over a century ago, it's on Archive, which means I can probably fix this reference -- but this speaks loudly about the quality of the section at this point. All of this, if not more, needs to be removed.70.49.181.61 (talk) 16:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After some more reviewing, it appears to me that not just the 'In Islam' section, but the entire article is filled with odd, unexplained, and invalid citations. Another citation looks like this -- "30 October 2009 (2009-10-30). "The six uses of paraclete by Philo tabulated (halfway down article)". Bibleq.info. Retrieved 2014-03-11." And it contains an embedded link. The problem is that the link is dead. Reference 5 in the page is just a copy and paste of some Greek text, with no explanation what the source of the Greek text is. The first reference of the page, to explain the etymology of the Greek word 'paraclete', goes to an online etymology website rather than a scholarly source. Apparently, the source for the websites etymology are other scholarly sources according to the main page -- but in this case, those sources, rather than the website, should be referred to. Reference 21, in the In Islam section, goes to Muslim apologetics book called 'The Promised Prophet of the Bible' -- clearly unreliable. The bottom of the page has a template 'People and things in the Qur'an' -- even though this page isn't in the template and the Paraclete is not mentioned in te Qur'an. 70.49.181.61 (talk) 17:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've fixed all these problems.70.49.181.61 (talk) 14:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]