Talk:Samuel

message: User:FDuffy appears to have identified a single source for claims that critical scholars believe that Samuel in the story of Hannah (Bible) really refers to Saul. No source is given in this article. User:FDuffy identified a source in the King Saul article, as the personal web site of Rabbi Moshe Reiss, , a self-published source. Per WP:RS, 
:A self-published source is a published source that has not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking, or where no one stands between the writer and the act of publication. It includes personal websites, and books published by vanity presses. Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.
None of the exceptions to self-published sources (e.g. by someone known to be highly regarded in a field) appear to apply here. Accordingly, it appears that this content is not reliably sourced and should be deleted. --Shirahadasha 13:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In contrast to this, critical scholars believe that 1 Samuel 1:20 originally described Saulfor example, New American Bible, footnote on 1 Samuel 1:20, a later editor substituting Samuel's name, in order to avoid the impression that Saul was originally dedicated to God, and had divine circumstances around his birth. This belief of critical scholars is attributed to the fact that Saul means asked, hence Hannah naming her child Saul because she had asked God for him makes more sense than her naming him Name of God or Heard of God.
--Shirahadasha 13:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Samuel-is-really-Saul material

message: The vast majority of references and explanations to the name Samuel include the explanation that it is a simple Hebrew sentence: "God has heard", (Remember Hebrew puts the verb first being a VSO language) rather than the awkwardly induced "Heard of God" that only a non Hebrew speaker would come up with.  My citation to that effect has been deleted and a whole lot of pov pushing supposedly from the Jewish Encyclopedia has gone up in its place.  Also, my red flag always goes up whenever I read that "Most scholars" are "in agreement" about anything to do with the Bible, since I know the fact is that Biblical scholars have seldom been "in agreement" on any single thing for the past 2000 years.  ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 16:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Totally disputed 

message: Hello, I skimmed the discussion and didn't notice any question on this so forgive me if this is repeated :).  Where is Judges 27?  Is this an outside source other then the Bible?  Just wondering because there are only 21 chapters in the book of Judges.  I am also making reference to this because I am curious with your source on how Elkanah was a Levite. (JulaBee (talk) 23:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference seems to be Judges 17:7, according to the cited article in the Jewish Encyclopedia.  Tb (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judges 27? 

message: ...says that Shmuel is derived from Sha'ul me'El. Though someone here might find that a bit interesting. Ayin/Yud 17:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The [[Radak]]... 

message: Agreed with previous poster.  The proper translation of Shemu'el is "God has heard".  "Shemu'" does come from the Hebrew root (transliterated into English) of sh-m-', meaning "to hear" or, more correctly, "he (has) heard."
As to the note about Samuel being "Saul" material, the source for this is dated.  Moreover, it does not make much sense to me since Samuel's prophetic career spans TWO kings--Saul and his successor, David.  Whoever the writer was, it doesn't seem (in my opinion) to lend credence to a schizophrenic Samuel, conversing with his own ghost at Endor. :) Jbeck-ot 04:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The scholarly "Samuel is Saul" claim is not that the biblical character of Samuel is the same character as the character of Saul. Nobody thinks a man called up his own ghost when speaking with the witch at Endor. The scholarly claim that you're describing in caricature is that some of the material about Samuel was originally about Saul. In particular, some scholars have argued that the birth story of Samuel was originally Saul's birth story. That's all.Alephb (talk) 12:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shemu'el 

message: I think I'll work on one. Any reason I shouldn't?
:Hi! As the article title says, this is the article on the Samuel who appears in the Bible, so any other Samuel should appear in a different article. There is a  Samuel article which is more general, however suggest a new article titled List of people named Samuel or similar. Note that some lists of this type have been deleted, so suggest starting with a short list and see if it meets any objections before putting a lot of work into it. --Shirahadasha 03:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be a very long list, and rather pointless.PiCo 07:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about adding a list of significant people named Samuel? 

message: Sorry about the stupid title, I had to have fun somewhere. 
But in all seriousness, Samuel is a figure that has for a long time been considered a staple in the old testament (looking at this from a catholic perspective, by the way), and has been taught as a profit and the anointer of kings for David and Saul. He is agreed by many to be his own important figure, not just a misinterpretation. Now, one possible translation error in ancient scrolls doesn't qualify nullifying his article in my opinion. Especially since there are thousands of different translators, each of whom has their own variance on the story, as well as many others. In fact, varying biblical translations are ever-expanding field that doesn't seem to have an end in sight. So far for a very long time many different religious scholars have agreed on his authenticity, enough to have him in the current versions of the stories in the bible, and to give him a mention in the Catholic Encyclopedia (under Kings I-II). I think that we should acknowledge the general consensus that Samuel is his own figure, and that he should stay that way, at least until there is concrete evidence which verifies the claim that Samuel is actually Saul, and debunks the previous evidence to his existence.
208.58.3.115 06:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  If the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit. 

message: I removed the word "important" from the lead sentence as the facts speak for themselves. I think the first two sentences should be merged, actually, or otherwise cleaned up a little. -- Kyle Maxwell (talk) 06:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section edited 

message: 1 part of the article implies that Samuel was at the age of maturity when God first spoke to him. However, I have not been able to find out how we know this. In other words, cindication needed.
--68.50.57.15 (talk) 23:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How old was Samuel? 

message: I think we must not minimize the role that according to the Bible people like Samuel believed to be God's commandament: to exterminate entire populations, even children, for political and religious purposes. For modern standards this is genocide and it shows that the Old Testament is full of unchristian actions.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.13.247.182 (talk) 01:51, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you think we should say in the article; your addition that he is "controversial" for "modern scholars" is odd; I don't know any modern scholars who support genocide, and I'm not sure what controversy you are pointing to.  Tb (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Genocides

message: "Samuel" Title for this article would be better,as the person is biblical figure as well as Islamic Prophet. The page 'Samuel' is now redirected to this page, but direct naming of this page as "Samuel' would be more appropriate.As we cannot do this change directly, Administrator may pl.help.--Md iet (talk) 05:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, I could not revert your move, so I've requested a move at WP:RM. The thing is, a person should be identified with the most common unique designation. Your proposal has two designations - WP:PRECISION notes that we should only be as precise as needful to identify a subject. See also WP:DEFINITE. Samuel (prophet) might have been OK, but you really should have looked for a consensus before you did this move. StAnselm (talk) 06:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

text: And I note we have something of a precedent with Nathan (prophet). But, unlike Nathan, Samuel is much more than a prophet - he is also a judge, etc. StAnselm (talk) 07:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: I reverted some edits by an anonymous editor who added Strongs' modern Hebrew transliteration because 1) The modern Hebrew transliteration is already there; 2) there's no good reason for the "w" in Strongs' Shemuwel - it's certainly not the "correct" transliteration. StAnselm (talk) 05:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's certainly a waw there, but that's the long "u" sound: Sh-moo-el. But, as I said, Shmu'el is fine, and that's what's already in the article. StAnselm (talk) 06:22, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

text: This has nothing to do with vowels in the Divine Name. Rather, the vowel after the "sh" is a shva. StAnselm (talk) 11:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: just an observation, maybe the issue could be solved by placing the phonetic pronunciation in brackets beside the name. cheers WookieInHeat (talk) 21:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

text: OK, I'm happy with that staying there. StAnselm (talk) 02:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Strongs' transliteration

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of minor Biblical figures which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 01:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of minor biblical figures which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 18:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: The article suggests that rabbinical sources say Samuel died at age 52. This seems at odds with a comparison of 1 Samuel chapter 8 where Samuel is supposed to be already old prior to Saul's anointing, and 1 Samuel chapters 19-25 wherein Samuel dies late in Saul's reign after David goes into hiding. This would ostensibly give Samuel an age of around 16 years of age when he is 'old' and looking around for a successor (up to a maximum of 29 if we very liberally cram all the events of 1 Samuel chapters 15-24 into 1 year). Is the age of 52 really an accurate mainstream rabbinical tradition? (Of course, we could ignore the tradition that Saul reigned for forty years, and instead go with Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews which states twice that Samuel's life only overlapped 18 years of Saul's 20-year reign, but that still only gets Samuel's age up to 35 when he is 'old' and looking for a successor, and also requires that Saul the 'youth' already has two adult sons when he is anointed.)--Jeffro77 (talk) 04:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the citation given only gives the Jerusalem Talmud, not a range of "classical rabbinic sources." So I made the claim more closely match the reference. Now the claim is attributed to the Jerusalem Talmud (which isn't even the main Talmud) rather than to rabbinical stuff in general. Alephb (talk) 05:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

text: This is all made-up stuff.  Nobody has any idea how he was when he died; it is not certain that such a person ever lived. Jytdog (talk) 06:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It wasn't a statement asserting that he actually lived, but only a statement about what the tradition says. My concern was that the article asserted a tradition that was not only entirely implausible but that also contradicts other elements of the same tradition regarding the characters involved. But deleting the statement altogether probably is the best solution.--Jeffro77 (talk) 06:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have some proof that it is all made-up stuff, please post the proof; also the proof that nobody has any idea how he was when he died, also the proof that it is not certain that such a person ever lived.  As to the Talmuds, they are way too far removed in time from the Tanach to show a continuous "tradition," though it certainly is interesting to know what they say about Samuel.  (PeacePeace (talk) 04:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem confused about the 'burden of proof', which is on those who assert that accounts of Samuel are true, not on those who indicate that there isn't reliable evidence for the positive claim.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:59, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samuel's age 

message: "33 And these are they that waited, and their sons. Of the sons of the Kohathites: Heman the singer, the son of Joel, the son of Samuel, . . . ." Thus I changed the article to read grandson, instead of great-grandson.  I realize that it is possible for names to be omitted in genealogies, but I don't seen any grounds for postulating a missing name here. Or does someone have such evidence?  (PeacePeace (talk) 04:05, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heman apparently was grandson, not great-grandson of Samuel 

message: need a section on historicity, extra-biblical evidence, etc.  will be adding that this week.... Jytdog (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  historicity 

message: The dates in the infobox are clarified as traditional, there's no reason to revert them. Even then, they were also proposed by William Albright,  as the citations attested, who is usually cited as an authoritative source in datings of biblical events, so I see no reason to remove them solely from the infobox. Also, the Albright citation is backed up by several other scholarly sources, which are cited alongside it, so why remove it? יבריב (talk) 15:00, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for opening a discussion here. Infoboxes are for facts.  We do not know if Samuel existed for sure; if he did we do not know when he was born or died.  Yes there is no doubt that there are a lot of refs that provide historical recontructions and dates within those constructions. Jytdog (talk) 15:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates/location

message: , , anyone interested.
About the move of Tomb of Samuel from separate section here: . My problem is that the tomb is not a part of Biblical account, and I think we should be strict in these articles on what is Bible and what is other stuff. "Perspectives" perhaps, if own section is unacceptable? Sources hint that all of the big three sees the tomb as "traditional".
Btw, good improvement on images and image-texts. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:22, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You've got a point there about the biblical distinction. Maybe we should do the same as in the article about David, i.e. link to it in the See Also section? --HyperGaruda (talk) 16:13, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not unreasonable, but IMO the images motivates a mention in article-text. While not Biblical, it's an interesting aspect of this topic. 18:45, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tomb of Samuel 

message: I tweaked... Samuel born c. 1102 BC, died c. 1014 BC<ref]https://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-exodus-route-date-1200-1004bc.jpg </ref], was a prophet and judge… 73.85.202.150 (talk) 14:49, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samuel born c. 1102 BC, died c. 1014 BC, was a Prophet and Judge of Israel 

message: Is there any merit to adding a user-drawn rendition of his name in Islamic calligraphy? —C.Fred (talk) 21:10, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Off the top of my head, no. Something not usergenerated would be preferable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islamic calligraphy?