2

This is a proposal to have a post with answers that generally cover various things, such as the Muslims that we get regularly trying to convince us the Jesus wasn't killed, or the Atheists and others who try to convince us that the Bible is faulty, or, most recently, that Jesus is a myth borrowed from other myths. The point is to give the "refute this" type posters something to read instead of a platform to keep talking. The start of the post follows:


Welcome to the site. We are very happy you have decided to participate. If you were directed here by another user it is because some of your posts, comments, or chat messages are something that is both off-topic for the site, and we have already heard it before and are likely not very interested in discussing the topic. To be fair, the topic is allowed in chat and if you would like to post there and see if anyone responds, you are welcome to do so.

There are some of the following topics that we have already heard before:

  • To Muslims: Christians, whom many of us are, believe Jesus died and was resurrected. You do not believe that. We have heard this before.
  • To Bible Critics: You believe the Bible is false or corrupt in some way. Generally, Christians do not. We have heard these arguments before.
  • To Jesus Critics: You believe that the stories about Jesus are false or derived from other myths, etc. Generally, Christians believe the stories are true. We have heard these arguments before.

Scroll down to see others and read our generalized response. Please refrain from commenting on these posts here, instead comment where the person directed you or comment in the chat rooms. If you have another topic to add, simple post a new answer.


So we can start by having people post for the items listed or others they can think of, or, of course, I welcome posts about what people think about this idea.

I envision a post, say the Muslim one, where an obvious Muslim is saying Jesus was not killed and I can simply link to the answer that covers this and say "We have already heard this before." When they click the link they see my bullet point above in a 1st level heading right at the top.

Once there are a few posts, I will edit out the top and bottom sections of this post and then we will have this new resource to use.

  • I think it depends on what you mean by "faulty". If you assume that the Bible is a very human book and comes from humans, and humans are fallible, then the Bible logically supposed to be fallible as well, and praising it more highly than it should be would be overrating it. I'm not sure which definition of "true" you are using here to describe Jesus' stories. Stories can't be true or false in terms of correct or incorrect. They have a more qualitative, subjective appeal to them that makes them stand out personally. :) – Double U Oct 26 '13 at 12:05
  • fred., no, I don't think you are right. Folks often, if not always, look for an answer on SE network, -1. – Elberich Schneider Oct 26 '13 at 12:58
  • @Elberich You rarely make sense. Right about what? That some people come to this site with the intention of having an argument? Or that they are already convinced and are trying to prove something rather than learn something? If think this does not occur then you are wrong. I can give three users off the top of my head right now that were/are like this in just the last few months. – fredsbend Oct 26 '13 at 18:05
  • fred., I'm only saying that people here want to learn something about Christianity -- i.e., they want to learn something. This is what a question is made for; but, as is known, Christianity is a sensible argument, thus sometimes some questions can reasonably be read as you say. Then, don't care, being a Christian means taking up the cross and carrying it with Jesus. – Elberich Schneider Oct 26 '13 at 20:37
  • 2
    @Elberich That is exactly my point! You seem unaware that we get visitors to this site that are not here to learn. They come here to convince the Christians here that they are wrong in some way. Here is three users that have consistently probed the same issues "That we have already heard." You get it now? – fredsbend Oct 26 '13 at 20:59
  • fred., yes, I see, that member is surely under Satan's control. However, as I'm new here, I'm still not aware of the largeness of this phenomenon, but, until now, if any, I noted that this site is the reign (or should it be 'realm'? Sorry I don't speak English) of the so-called 'politically correctness', which is the death of Christianity -- i.e., a Christian should have the courage to say the thing as they really are. – Elberich Schneider Oct 26 '13 at 21:19
  • 1
    @ElberichSchneider You say "political correctness", I say "basic civility". Please don't accuse other people of being under Satan's control. That is poisonous to constructive discourse and is a fundamentally unhealthy attitude to take towards other human beings. – James T Oct 28 '13 at 23:00
7

Rather than a post, the Stack Exchange way of accomplishing this would be to link to the duplicate question. Alternatively, we can close questions for being 'general philosophical inquiry' which is off topic.

I, too, am kind of tired of the 'refute this you silly close-minded idiots. I read some thing on the internet that shows how stoopid you are so there!'

In general, I wish I could just have a macro that would apply to these questions. It would simply say:

Dear OP. This is a place to ask questions. If you want to learn something, you're in the right place. If you are just looking to teach something, please try Quora, Wikipedia, or better yet, your own blog. We are interested in expanding open minds. If yours is as closed as your question appears to be, you're in the wrong place.

  • I see what you mean by linking duplicates, but that is not what I am referring to. The type of questions I have in mind are usually off-topic, therefore, any duplicates would be closed as well or even deleted. Since the primary purpose of this is to let them know that we are likely not very interested, I figured a response to the basic question is in order, which they would read here, then they could go to chat if they want to discuss it with anyone. – fredsbend Oct 28 '13 at 18:26
  • I actually did consider proposing a macro that searched the post for certain triggers that signal this type of question. I figured the SE team would not approve of it though. Also, I would feel really bad it the macro caught a genuine question. – fredsbend Oct 28 '13 at 18:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .