Talk:Paradise

Slavic 'ray', etymology

I've added regarding the "Persian origin" of the word. The word is most likely Iranian indeed (Vasmer's dictionary agrees), but is not necessary of Persian origin; that would be especially doubtful considering the absense of any direct contact between Persians and proto-Slavs. Vasmer himself brings up the Mordvin word "riz" of Iranian origin, but its exact origin is Sarmathian (like a great part of Mordvin vocabulary), not Persian. Scythians and Sarmathians apparently were the only Iranian groups who contacted proto-Slavs as well. These days "Iranian" and "Persian" are mostly synonyms (because Iran is an official name of the modern day Persia), but it isn't always so.95.84.196.225 (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Weight

The subsection about Jehovah's Witnesses basically re-states, at some length, what is already stated as Irenaeus' 2nd century view about paradise, and that they accept a rendering of Luke 23:43 that is consistent with the Curetonian Gospels. These views clearly are not unique to Jehovah's Witnesses, and seems unnecessary to elaborate on their specific view here. Belief that the 'righteous' will live on a literal 'restored' earth after the 'millenium' rather than in 'heaven' is a general belief of Adventism (from which Jehovah's Witnesses originated), and should not be misrepresented as a belief unique to JWs.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:29, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

The problem with atheism

It's a myth that atheists become Christians when they go to hell or paradise. Statistically only 3 to 12% change opinion (watch Robert Sapolsky, openness on Vimeo), and we know that from other psychological tests. Most atheists would believe that they are scientifically and without magic transfered to a parallel universe with a monarch named god.

On the other hand ALL Christians change opinion when they go to the atheistic equivalent of hell and paradise; the nothingness. ALL Christians then become religiously neutral; because nothingness doesn't allow thought.

One might claim: "yes, but we don't know, either the atheists or the Christians are right".
Both experiencing and non-experiencing are empirical and not merely intellectual, mathematical or logical assessments.
Both experiencing and non-experiencing aren't a causal analyses of the specific systemic processes.
It is a mere empirical experience. Empiricism doesn't lead to systemic knowledge as metalogic.
Study the work of Bertrand Russell.

keep it here, national flags (UK, Finland, Georgia...) depict the sign of the cross, so even non Christian citizens have the right to contribute to the "controversy" paragraph (for important subjects there is a controversy section) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4105:2C00:6057:C7B1:7B56:C232 (talk) 02:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• watch Robert Sapolsky, openness on Vimeo

1. experience doesn't have a single interpretation
2. empiricism isn't the only methodology which shapes opinions; try metalogic

Re: Paradise (Hebrew Related/Word or Cognate Version)

Hi, everyone :)

Just wanted to mention (include) this unmentioned detail-which perhaps, should be mentioned (?!) for purposes of wholesome information about the (inevitably, similar-sounding/appearing) Hebrew word of: par'des=פַּרְדֵּס (which, like its Persian & preceding derivative equivalents, respectively, referred to a garden/an enclosure-like garden space which this Hebrew word DOES portray). AK63 (talk) 05:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Islamic Art

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sdolphin02 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Shakera Patterson, Zorabissell, Joe.harkins.richmond.

— Assignment last updated by Shakera Patterson (talk) 04:58, 14 December 2022 (UTC)