Talk:Lifnei iver

From VfD

Lifnei iver

An unencyclopedic priciple of Jewish law. Delete. JFW | T@lk 23:29, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Given the support below, I'd like to add the following. Clearly, any principle from the Talmud will then gain its own article... There are literally hundreds of them. Are we waiting for ha-motzi me-chavero alav ha-ra'aya, teiku (tishbi yiftor kushiot u-ba'ayot), or the very parallel lo ta'amod al dam rei'echa? JFW | T@lk 07:09, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• • Yeah, bring 'em on. A subject that is large requires more space. Everyking 07:50, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• Keep, it has info that isn't contained in 613 mitzvot. --Starx 23:41, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• If it wasn't for the fact that there's 613 of the things, I'd say merge and redirect. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:30, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Interesting and important concept (to me). This also appears in Cherem, but not by name. Are there any modern laws who's origin is this? Entrapment? There Might be a better place to put this, but I wouldn't like to see it deleted. Pud
  • Merge with a term from general law might be a good move. JFW | T@lk 07:09, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Keep and wikify (possibly merge with 613 mitzvot) -- Chris 73 | Talk 00:49, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Could use some work, but being a principle of Jewish law makes it automatically encyclopedic. Everyking 02:40, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, along with any other of the 613 mitzvot, and similar components of other religious laws. Now wikified. --Zigger 03:05, 2004 Jun 6 (UTC)
• Keep. Can't really judge accuracy but reads like a fine short article to me. Are jdfwolff's objections to the quality of the article or just to the subject? He needs to articulate this more clearly. Re "there are 613 of the things:" the article is about 1200 bytes long. Hypothetically, if each of the 613 mitzvot were to receive an article of similar length that would be less than a megabyte total. If that were to happen I would think it would be a great addition to Wikipedia. Note, too, that 613 articles would constitute 613/279454 = 0.2% of Wikipedia, which is a lot but hardly excessive. It's not as if that would crowd out other religions. Conversely, if this much information were moved into 613 mitzvot it would become a 700K article, which, interestingly enough, is much shorter than the article on "Bible" in the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, but much too long for Wikipedia. Dpbsmith 10:41, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. An informative and interesting expansion of its one-line entry on 613 mitzvot. IMO, definitely encyclopedic and worthy of its own page. --Diberri | Talk 03:36, Jun 8, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. So what if there's 613 other possible similar articles? They'll be individually judged as they're written. Should we delete the article on Abraham Lincoln because there are several million other people born in Kentucky? MK 07:07, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. interesting enough. --Woggly 11:21, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

end moved discusiion

duplicate article redirected

Livnei ever was redirected here. The body of that article before the redirection can be found here: [1] Shawnc 22:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Here is a list of Talmudic citations.

Here is a list of Talmudic citations, from the page on Religious views of suicide.

Talmud Bavli (B.) Pesah.im 22b; B. Mo'ed Katan 5a, 17a; B. Bava Mezia 75b. and B. Nedarim 42b

Perhaps somebody who is good with Talmud can go through them and add them as references to the page. I am unsure of what reference format to use. --Metzenberg 03:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Stumbling block in Christian theology

I was curious about the concept of the stumbling block, and how it has been interpreted by Christians. It was interesting to google the term, and find out that the concept is extended in Christianity, and that the same concept is used in the New Testament in ways that obviously refer to the original statement of the law in Leviticus. Thus, the original law has had great influence. I know nothing about Christian theology. Perhaps somebody else will be able to add to this. --Metzenberg 07:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The stumbling block article seems to indicate that Leviticus 19:14 is the common source both of this article and that one. A needed WP:POVFORK? In ictu oculi (talk) 18:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)