Talk:Prophets in Judaism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spamming this page[edit]

Considering the recurring edits that are happening on this page, and considering I am reasonably certain the edit I just made is correct, since I have the cited source open in front of me, it might be worth it to lock this page to further edits for a while. Aviray48 (talk) 07:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In last week many unwanted edits happened to this article. Wikipedia should lock this page. Mehediabedin (talk) 07:41, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

who is Aisling prophet of Carmel?[edit]

Searching only finds copies of this page or excerpts from it. Also the list of 48 prophets has 49, and this is the only one without his own wikipedia page — Preceding unsigned comment added by WarrenBurstein (talkcontribs) 22:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

not good enough[edit]

Reference 4 is obviously copied from some material that the writer of this article did not understand. WHICH glosses give the list of male prophets? Megillah 14a/b only gives prophetesses. I realize a lot of data was chunked in from old works but old works are notoriously outdated, inaccurate and incomplete. Here is one example. 100.15.127.199 (talk) 20:05, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing this page to be like prophets of Islam?[edit]

Thoughts on editing this page to be in a table like the Prophets and messengers in Islam page? Looks much better imo Mishael613 (talk) 14:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How many prophets, 46 or 48?[edit]

The intro and the first sentence in the section Rabbinic tradition say 48 prophets and 7 prophetesses. The immediately-following list says 46. And then there are 7 prophets to the gentiles, it's not clear how those should be counted.

Rashi says "two [of the prophets] I don't know," presumably accounting for the missing two. Other sources identify the missing two prophets as Oded and Hanani Haroeh.

Meanwhile the Table of prophets of Abrahamic religions page lists 69.

I suggest that this ought to be clarified as the article as-is is very confusing. Czetie (talk) 09:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]