Talk:in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

RFD discussion: October–December 2017
Dictionary material? SemperBlotto (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No. Delete. - TheDaveRoss  12:53, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. — SGconlaw (talk) 14:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Hasn't even really got a definition. Equinox ◑ 15:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Is it because it is a religious formula? We have [[don't let the bedbugs bite]], which is principally distinguished from the phrase in question by being cute. As for definitions, we use on 13,632 pages. DCDuring (talk) 17:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure whether it should be called a formula, but it's actually recitation rather than an exclamation. And it comes at the end of a prayer (followed by ), not at the beginning. DonnanZ (talk) 10:00, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The relevant WP article is DCDuring (talk) 21:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It can come at either the beginning or the end (or both!). It can also be used in other situations, such as during a baptism. I'm kind of torn – on the one hand, it isn't very idiomatic and means pretty much exactly what it says (assuming we have the relevant senses of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); on the other hand, it might be good as a translation target, especially if there are languages whose corresponding formula isn't a literal translation of this phrase. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:40, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It is more or less a set phrase though, and I don't think it should be classified as an interjection, whatever happens. DonnanZ (talk) 10:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Changed to a phrase by Angr. DonnanZ (talk) 11:01, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's a set phrase, but for me the lack of idiomaticity is conclusive. It's not used as a proverb or anything else apart from as part of a prayer, so it's essentially sum-of-parts. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:10, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * My objection has nothing to do with the religiosity of the phrase, it is that it is a sentence fragment rather than a distinct term. The example of don't let the bedbugs bite: can be used idiomatically to mean goodnight:, whereas this is closer to how's the weather:. It might be a phrasebook or appendix candidate for translating of set religious phrases, but it is not, in itself, a term. - TheDaveRoss  13:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It's as much a sentence fragment as any other prepositional phrase, some of which are used in isolation, like up yours. It's use as an opening or closing of a ritual or part of a ritual does not follow from its literal meaning. DCDuring (talk) 21:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that we have the Arabic equivalent at باسم الأب والابن والروح القدس as well as three variants of it. If this is deleted, I suppose they should be too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:42, 12 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Even though it's borderline, I am leaning towards keep, especially in the light of the translations that have been dug up, even if most of them are red links. DonnanZ (talk) 23:07, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I added most of those translations, but they're all word for word identical to the English and could be considered just as SOP as the English. But I still can't quite decide whether this is dictionary-worthy or not. I'll have to think some more on it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Not quite word for word in Bokmål and Nynorsk, and Nynorsk has no less than four differences in spelling when compared with Bokmål. DonnanZ (talk) 14:39, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete or convert it to a translation target if there are enough non-SOP translations. Use is not limited to rituals and prayers and that it is a specifically Christian formula is obvious if you know enough context—which this dictionary covers. A variant with instead of Holy Spirit is also attestable, in case this is kept. Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * There are also other variants such as in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 14:48, 13 October 2017 (UTC)


 * By the way, we have an entry already for (Jesus, the law, etc.). Equinox ◑ 15:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * And for ; piecing all these bits together in different languages can be a different matter. DonnanZ (talk) 16:43, 14 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not mean anything more than what it says. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 01:29, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * At the very least it's an ellipsis: (the following/preceding prayer/ritual is/was spoken/performed) in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (thereby being performed and valid in trinitarian religions). If my interpretation is correct that would make it a speech act, which are per se idioms. DCDuring (talk) 03:37, 15 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. A dictionary is not the place for this. Mihia (talk) 22:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. not idiomatic-Sonofcawdrey (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Barytonesis (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as a phrasebook entry. It's a useful phrase to any Catholic and many other Christians, but it's not idiomatic enough to be kept as a normal entry. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 20:00, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Deleted. bd2412 T 14:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)