-4

I've posted answers on a few of these types of questions so far Where does the belief that the Earth is relatively young (6000 years) come from?

And the only thing that a YEC answer sparks is debating, ridicule and offensive comments. I understand that we are to handle these incidents as they are found.

However: How should I/We propose an answer from this point of view in the future that will minify the possible debates?

When dealing with sources I get a) these views are not accepted. b) please post sources so that I can ridicule them.

Another perfect example

I've answered by linking to a scientific source and explained the sources position. As I would be expected to do on skeptics.

And OH! look.. another troll What is the physical evidence for a global flood?

2
  • 5
    Phrases like "I think you'll find his theory incredibly compelling", seem to indicate that you're trying to argue in favor of this position instead of objectively stating what the position is. People are not "trolling" you, they are simply pointing out that your answers are subjective and misleading.
    – hammar
    Commented Aug 31, 2011 at 21:27
  • 4
    Most of the ridicule and offensive comments, from what I've seen, have originated from the YEC advocates themselves.
    – Bruce Alderman
    Commented Aug 31, 2011 at 21:34

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
8

As one of the people who voted down that question:

  1. You clearly took one side of the debate and promoted it
  2. Your answer was wrong, to the extent that it only talked about science (which is at best a side-issue) and failed to mention the origins of YEC in a literal interpretation of Genesis
  3. You patronized those who hold a different view from you
7

After answering the question in the first paragraph, you took that question as an opportunity to go on about why you feel your belief justified. If you then covered the other possible beliefs, and explain why they believe what they believe, that would be a solid answer.

Right now, it reads as preachy, not explanatory. That's a problem, no matter the belief.

1
  • The OP asked, where does this argument originate from. IMHO there was nothing preachy about it. "It was a statement" and I made that statement many times.
    – capitalaudience.com
    Commented Aug 31, 2011 at 18:40
6

The main problem with your answer is that instead of trying to answer what young earth creationists believe, and why they hold this belief, it tries to argue that these views are truth.

The truth of any christian belief is, as far as I've understood, off topic on this site.

It's also very misleading in that it attempts to treat highly disputed claims as "scientific".

The answer should instead try to answer objectively what the belief is, and on what basis the belief is held.

For example, instead of saying "I think that Y is true", try to rephrase it as "Members of X belive/claim that Y is true", preferably with a reference to confirm that this belief is indeed held by X.

Think like you're writing an encyclopedia article. State what is believed, by who, without bringing your own subjective opinion into the matter.

From the Area 51 proposal:

This site should inform, not preach. – Kramii

2
  • You're asking me to provide evidence that I believe what I believe. I do not have to answer for the whole group, I can answer for myself. There are plenty of people on here asking others to answer from their own POV and not the POV of the group that they are trying to represent. The fact that I answered from my pov does not invalidate my answer.
    – capitalaudience.com
    Commented Aug 31, 2011 at 18:31
  • 4
    @Jonathon Byrd: I'm asking for evidence that your beliefs are representative for your group. Answers on this site should not be what one individual believes, but what various christian groups believe. This is christianity.SE not jonathonbyrd.SE.
    – hammar
    Commented Aug 31, 2011 at 18:33
-1

Maybe creationism should be off topic for this site.

I looked at the two answers you've linked here, and neither one has anything to do with biblical interpretation—they only tangentially reference the Bible at all. If this site were not Christianity+BiologicalSciencesAnd/OrGeology.SE, I could see a justification for including these questions and answers. As it is just Christianity.SE, I think we will avoid a lot of argumentation if we just exclude all discussion of creationism.

3
  • seeing as this is designed to be a christians question and answer site, these questions have a lot to do with our beliefs. We just need to learn how to propose them appropriately.
    – capitalaudience.com
    Commented Aug 31, 2011 at 21:55
  • @Jonathon: But that doesn't mean everything that's even tangentially related to Christianity. Creationism isn't one of the core Christian beliefs, and if it's this contentious it will drag down the quality of the site.
    – Bruce Alderman
    Commented Sep 1, 2011 at 13:59
  • that's a fair statement. we should refrain from things, but we shouldn't be excluded from everything.
    – capitalaudience.com
    Commented Sep 1, 2011 at 14:05

You must log in to answer this question.

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