Skip to main content
14 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 5 at 15:09 comment added depperm Let us continue this discussion in chat.
Jan 5 at 14:07 comment added Lesley @depperm - Likewise with the proposed 'scriptural-basis' tag. Whose scriptures? Where will all of this end?
Jan 5 at 14:00 comment added Lesley If a tag such as 'lds-basis' was created, then anybody who wanted to know what the Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants & Pearl of Great Price teaches, could be submitted in support of LDS beliefs. As for 'psalm-basis' Christians know that comes from the O.T. and 'gospel-basis' comes from the N.T. But 'canon-basis' begs the question, "Whose Canon?" Do we then need a tag for 'judaism-canon' or 'swedenborgian-canon' or 'bahai-canon'? Or 'roman-catholic-canon' or 'eastern-orthodox-canon' or 'protestant-canon'? Does Stack Exchange want to prohibit 'biblical-basis' questions and answers?
Jan 5 at 12:49 comment added depperm could probably still keep biblical-basis for common beliefs or common-ground building questions, but canon-based might be clearer for denomination specific questions
Jan 5 at 12:47 comment added depperm I feel like a canon-based tag would allow all Christians to answer fully from their perspective, for most this is just the bible and would basically be the same as biblical-basis. It allows every denomination to use the necessary scriptures to explain their beliefs from the sources they rely on and it allows the questioner to see that this denomination has wider canon (whether this is a few extra books in the bible or additional scripture like the Book of Mormon).
Jan 5 at 12:42 comment added depperm @Lesley I don't see the unambiguity. 'psalm-basis', 'torah-basis', 'gospels-basis' are also specific, but that doesn't change the fact that it limits the answerer to give an uncomplete response. pygosceles idea of 'common-ground' tag might be a better way. A few of the recent lds biblical-basis questions from my perspective are from those who continuous post anti lds rhetoric, in what I see as an attempt to discredit my beliefs. If I can only use half the alphabet to speak anything I say will be a lot less clear than if allowed full alphabet(canon).
Jan 5 at 12:22 comment added Lesley @depperm - If a question about Christianity asks for the biblical basis for a belief, then Christians should be able to turn to the Bible to support their views. I realise that the Bible is not the full canon for LDS but the Bible is the crucial, fundamental word of God upon which Christianity is based. Are your beliefs supported by the Old and New Testaments of the Bible? If so, then there should never be any difficulty in quoting from the Bible in support of your beliefs. A tag like "scriptural-basis" or "canon-basis" is ambiguous. The "biblical-basis" tag on CSE is unambiguous.
Jan 5 at 12:04 comment added depperm @Lesley it's not the full canon. If I ask you to support your belief using only 50% of the books you believe in from the bible, would that correctly represent your beliefs? Yes you believe the whole bible, but particular truths are best taught in certain books/verses. Additional tag ideas might be canon-basis
Jan 4 at 15:26 comment added Lesley "In addition to the Bible..." the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has other scriptures including the Book of Mormon. You say "Since this site recognizes Mormons as Christians" and this is "a site about Christianity", then surely it is wholly appropriate to ask for the biblical basis for LDS doctrines? By all means they can quote from their own scriptures, including the Book of Mormon, but what is wrong in asking for the Christian Bible basis to support their doctrines?
Jan 2 at 14:34 comment added depperm should the biblical-basis tag be updated to scriptural-basis to match the description better: "Biblical basis" is the way in which a practice or belief is derived from Scripture. Use this tag to ask how Christians use the Bible to derive a specific belief. (maybe a slight modification in the final sentence?)
Jan 2 at 3:37 history edited Ken GrahamMod CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 1 character in body
Jan 2 at 3:31 comment added Ken Graham Mod If the community decides with this, I would like this to be a policy going forward.
Jan 2 at 3:26 history edited Ken GrahamMod CC BY-SA 4.0
added 2083 characters in body
Jan 2 at 3:10 history answered Ken GrahamMod CC BY-SA 4.0