Talk:Joachim of Fiore

Apocalypse

"The Apocalypse" as a stand-alone phrase is not the common way in the English language to refer to the last book of the New Testament; changing to "Book of Revelation". AnonMoos 16:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Books

Could someone elaborate as to what Joachim's "Three great books" were? I would like to find them. ThePeg 22:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The titles are listed. If you come across translations by searching the Latin titles at amazon.com, maybe you'd add them to the article. --Wetman 22:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The one publication I have been able to find which includes Fiori's work (including some of his diagrams and illustrations) is the anthology Apocalyptic Spirituality published by Paulist Press. ThePeg 11:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

2020

His main book was "The Everlasting Gospel." Apparently it was circulated in manuscript form for hundreds of years. I have been looking for a copy, translated into English for decades. I have never found it, though I understand it was highly influential. Tommaso Campanella may provide the correct lead. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C54:7E00:4401:E8B3:E1DD:C2CB:A159 (talk) 21:07, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Neo-Joachimism

What is the source for neo-joachimism? 70.94.8.139 19:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it was earlier versions of the German article de:Joachim von Fiore , but it seems to be gone from the German version of the article now (though there's a link Jürgen Kuhlmann: Neujoachimismus). There's some discussion on the German Wikipedia article talk page... AnonMoos 11:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I finally removed the Neo-Joachimism section, since no verification was added for a long time, and since the German Wikipedia editors are probably in a better position to learn about it, and they removed it from their version of the article. AnonMoos 21:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Bibliography

List of books by Marjorie Reeves at WorldCat, should also look for her journal articles. --Avirr (talk) 03:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Enoch

Is Joachim of Fiore an Enochian ? I seem to have detected similarities between the teachings of Fiore and those who are said to follow the teachings of Enoch. ADM (talk) 12:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Obama "hoax"

In the section about the Obama "hoax", there are three citations. All three of them state that Obama referred to Joachim in his speeches.

I think there's a problem with Wikipedia saying unambiguously "this is a hoax" without any citations backing that up. And it's even odder when we do include citations that claim it's true. Can someone find an actual citation that says it's false? (I removed the words "of course" from the sentence "Of course, no citation in any actual speech of Obama's quoting or mentioning Joachim has been produced." The words "of course" do not obviate the need for a citation.) — Lawrence King ^(talk) 16:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Also: This section begins with the words "Recently, a hoax has been circulating that..." When I read these words, it makes me think that there's a chain email about it, or someone on some television show claimed this. But in fact, Barack Obama is stated to have said these words according to the Italian press agency Adnkronos and The Times of London. (See the citations in that section.) Even if it turns out that Obama never said this, should Wikipedia really use the phrase "a hoax has been circulating" to indicate false statements in reputable newspapers? The word "hoax" requires deliberate falsification; is there any evidence of that? — Lawrence King ^(talk) 16:17, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

"Encyclopedic content must be verifiable."

In that spirit, I have commented out the "Hoax" section. It can be uncommented once reliable references (for or against) are found. 88.89.239.218 (talk) 17:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Condemnation

This section has apparent historical inaccuracies. It differs from the Catholic Encyclopedia and other Church Histories. The actual documents need to be cited and quoted from. For instance, other entries on this subject say that St. Thomas Aquinas only disagreed with ONE of Joachim's theories; and that the Synod of Arles did not condemn Joachim's theories, but the spurious writings attributed to him after his death; and that Pope Alexander did not condemn all of Joachim's writings, as stated here, but rather just one of his theories. Someone needs to read the actual documents in question and quote from them verbatim. --Patriarchs Press (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Influence of concept on Nazis

Shouldn't mention be made of Joachim's influence on Moeller van den Bruck's Das Dritte Reich? The notion of a third age or kingdom had an enduring mystical-political influence, in various forms, up to the Nazi appropriation of Moeller's title. See for example Fritz Stern, The Politics of Cultural Despair (1961), 253. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.232.115.107 (talk) 02:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

From the articles, Arthur Moeller van den Bruck was not a Nazi, and article Das Dritte Reich does not mention Joachim. Nazis were almost certainly influenced by Guido von List much more than Joachim von Fiore... AnonMoos (talk) 13:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Second half of "Literary References" seems to have a non neutral point of view

It seems as though the second half of the literary references talking about various conspiracy theory novels is both biased and has several mistakes. Could someone please take a look at this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.78.122.16 (talk) 17:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

The Third Age

The article states that "according to Joachim" the Third Age will begin in year 1260. This is entirely and utterly false. Whoever knows Joachim's works (and especially the Concordia) knows how careful Joachim was with dates. Joachim never actually established a precise year for the beginning of the Third Age, he only mentions "generations", never "years". He knew that if he claimed that the new age of the Spirit would begin in a specific year, he would have been accused of chiliasm (millenarianism) and possibly condemned as an heretic. Only years after his death, when his treaties became famous in the Franciscan order, some theologians tried to calculate a precise year on the "generations" mentioned by Joachim. The writers who mentioned the year 1260 were Gerard of San Donnino (actually condemned as heretic), Peter of John Olivi, Ubertino da Casale, John of Parma, Salimbene de Adam etc. I am therefore going to correct the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.216.95.65 (talk) 07:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Joachim of Fiore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120414231546/http://www.liv.ac.uk/~spmr02/rings/trinity.html to http://www.liv.ac.uk/~spmr02/rings/trinity.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120414231546/http://www.liv.ac.uk/~spmr02/rings/trinity.html to http://www.liv.ac.uk/~spmr02/rings/trinity.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:25, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Rick roll. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)