Category talk:Scriptures

Seems a rather under-populated, redundant category to me. Iz I wrong though? ħuman 00:18, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

We should have at least five pages here, and for those five, we need this category. There should be a whole lot more filed under this; the rest of the bible summary project, certainly. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 00:53, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but it's an ugly cat name. What would be here that's not under, say, "Bible"? I also object, at some level, to calling them "scriptures". Whatever the hell that means. ħuman 01:02, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Scriptures means all the books that, for one reason or another, have ever been called holy. Dianetics, al Quran, and Stranger in a Strange Land all fit under this category without being part of "Bible". And we really should be discussing these things on this site, and so we need this cat to organise them (does it strike anyone else as funny that we rely on cats to organise wikis?) Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 11:23, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Ah, ok, I see your point, thanks. And, yes, that is funny. ħuman 14:50, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

And let us not forget, should the necessity arise, the Bhagvad-Gita, the Avesta, the Urantia Book, and probably the Tao Te Ching and A Course In Miracles. The category can reasonably defined as "foundational religious literature", and although the Talmud is kind of on the bubble most of what's in this category fits that definition. EVDebs 03:08, 4 June 2008 (EDT)