Jump to content

Talk:Laying on of hands: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
}}
}}
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine|class=Start}}
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine|class=Start}}
}}}
}}


==Untitled==
==Untitled==

Revision as of 20:42, 16 November 2011

Untitled

ŭIs healing by laying on hands an exclusively christian belief? -- Miguel

No.


Removed from main article:

Sources: Marc Bloch, Les Rois Thaumaturges, pp. 36-38, 41-49 Gabor Klaniczay, The Uses of Supernatural Power: The Transformation of Popular Religion in Medieval and Early-Modern Europe, Princeton U. Press, 1990, p. 91 Cynthia Hahn, Portrayed on the Heart: Narrative Effect in Pictorial Lives of Saints from the Tenth through the Thirteenth Century, U. of California Press, Berkeley, 2001, p. 249 Henry A. Myers and Herwig Wolfram, Medieval Kingship, Nelson-Hall, Chicago, 1972, pp. 167, 335

Healing long before the christians

that article is just christian propaganda healing was done long before the christians and everyone can learn it althought the skill of them will differ as the time to learn the skill in these times and in former times you could even enhance these abilities through chemical substances and brain stimulation

+++ This is the Test ==== By what Name or Authority are you laying on hands?

Grammar

I've always taken issue with the grammar of "lay on hands", but it seems to make a bit more sense as "the laying on of hands". Even given that, though, the ultimately correct grammar would be to hyphenate "laying-on", highlighting the fact that "on" is a particle describing "laying" (in "lay on hands", the lack of hyphen leaves the reader assuming that somebody is laying something on top of somebody else's hands). I'm wondering if anyone has a good reason (i.e. recurring instances in English literature to the contrary) why the hyphen shouldn't be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.168.161.140 (talk) 01:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The term "laying on of hands" comes directly from the Bible, in verses such as Acts 8:18 and Hebrews 6:2. In the King James Version, there is no hyphen. Sherlock (talk) 05:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "laying on of hands" makes it clear that "on" is being used as an adverb rather than as a preposition, so that one is not laying something on someone's hands. Michael Hardy (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One uses a hyphen when connecting two words as a single adjective. E.g. "a twenty-dollar cake." A hyphen is not used for "laying on" anymore than it is for "eating up." 137.229.183.144 (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jesuit

I don't understand and I don't believe the following:

This is a popular Jesuit ceremony in which prayer for forgiveness is often the prelude that along with the cleansing of one's spirit, creates union with the Holy Spirit.

Could you explain and cite sources?

The image Image:Russian Orthodox Episcopal Ordination.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Catholicism section lacking

The section named "Catholicism" seems to deal only with Eastern Orthodox and Eastern rite Catholic traditions. We need to expand it to include Latin rite information. Anyone up to the task? --anietor (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced

This article only describes laying of hands in a Christian context. There are, of course, many other uses that should be in the article; for example !Kung people. --Fama Clamosa (talk) 12:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but am not qualified to provide what is lacking. I hope that future editors will remedy this problem by adding information about other cultures and traditions, and not by removing existing relevant info. MishaPan (talk) 18:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]