Do we ask about the views of xyz religion so we can understand them or so we can criticize them?

Question

My initial reaction to questions asking about the belief of a particular religion is that the question is seeking to understand the beliefs of that religion, possibly to include an analysis of what the questioner believes is a contradiction in the beliefs of that religion.

Though I contribute regularly on SE-Biblical Hermeneutics, I'm relatively inexperienced on this site. Recent evidence suggests I may have misunderstood the purpose of this site.

For example, there are frequent questions about beliefs espoused by the Catholic church. I have doctrinal disagreements with Catholicism, but I do not use these questions as a platform for those disagreements. Where I know what a writer/speaker accepted by Catholics has said, I share my thoughts (e.g. here); where I do not, I prefer to leave answering to those who do.

There have been quite a few questions recently about the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses and several about the beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In both cases, non-adherents to these views have used the questions (and their votes, though this is less surprising) to disparage these religions. Why?

A handful of examples from posts that have been active recently:

• Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses cite William Barclay as to the identity of the speaker in Revelation 22:13 knowing he believed it is Jesus?
• According to Jehovah's Witnesses and Unitarians and all who deny that Jesus is the Almighty God, how can He be in you and live in you?
• The Mormon Church teaches that Jesus Christ created under the direction of Heavenly Father and He did not create the world “out of nothing.”
• Since there is only one God who is not formed then how can the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that Jesus is a created god?
• Is the Book of Mormon in English as authentic as in the original, or is Joseph Smith's translation imperfect?

These all strike me as very legitimate questions. Yet the comments on these pages--and sometimes the answers themselves--are being used as a vehicle for criticizing these beliefs.

Two specifics that I find surprising:

On the first question noted above, the most upvoted answer (by 4x right now) assumes the adherents simply don't fact-check their beliefs and so they believe out of ignorance.

On the last question noted above, the most up-voted answer (by 7x right now) is an answer that does not attempt to engage with the beliefs of the adherents. It responds on the basis of textual criticism, which is not used by Latter-day Saints to adjudge the authenticity or authority of the Book of Mormon.

(to be sure, I think textual criticism is very interesting, but isn't this a topic for SE-Biblical Hermeneutics?)

If I have misunderstood the purpose of this site, I welcome the chance to learn a bit more. If I have not misunderstood the purpose of this site...then why do we keep doing this?

Answer 1

I actually came to meta with similar question. The second most upvoted answer in regards to the last question has 3 paragraphs that are against an LDS view, citing a known anti-Mormon. The first most upvoted answer as stated also doesn't reflect the LDS view point fully.

I am curious how a denomination tag doesn't set the authority/viewpoint being asked, especially when the question is in regards to one denominations beliefs that other denominations don't hold. Different denominations have specific beliefs, and one of the LDS's is the Book of Mormon. Who else would have the authority to answer unless there was a question like 'Why doesn't 'denomination X' believe in the Book of Mormon?'

The tagging page states:

A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.

So IMO an expert of a particular denomination would be a member of that faith and should be able to expect tagged questions to be asking for their denominations perspective. Those not of tagged denominations can answer if the answer reflects the denominations perspective. Answering otherwise or adding contradicting information seems like bad faith in that it looks like an attempt to put said denomination in bad light, to mislead those seeking answers from said denomination, or even plain misunderstanding a denominations beliefs. There are thousands of denominations so obviously there are difference in opinions. If denomination X answers about denomination Y and then also points out 'flaws' or arguments against said belief when answering a question this seems like an attempt to tear down instead of building or helping understand one another.

_{disclaimer I am LDS, and the last question especially seems like a fine question that I would expect the OP to want LDS answer, yet several answers seem to have posted answers that the LDS would not support}

Answer 2

There are some questions that are asked, not because the poster is honestly looking for an answer, but because he is looking for an excuse to engage in polemics. Jesus encountered many of these kinds of "gotcha" questions. Since I do not have His gifts of discernment of thoughts and intentions, I prefer to treat questions that could be honest as if they were, and answer as politely and factually as possible, which seems to be in accord with the purpose of the site. If the questioner's mind is already made up and he is more interested in carrying on a dispute than getting answers, this will become evident sooner or later. I would rather disengage, or even not engage in the first place, rather than be drawn into a possibly rancorous and probably fruitless attempt to convince or convert anyone.

Answer 3

There's a gray area between questions about historical criticism of religion, religious figures and religious text and doctrine.

We don't allow questions that are like "What does God think about ..." and we don't allow questions like "is X a sin" without more context.

I think that Mormon question at the end was the best example, I don't want to delete a highly voted answer unless the OP clearly states that they want an answer from an LDS perspective (tagging just sets the subject, not the authority), otherwise a non-sectarian answer is perfectly acceptable, the problem is the question should have been closed before it could be answered because it appeals to authority without defining whose authority.

Answers on Jehovah's Witnesses questions are often flagged and you don't see most of 'em, we often let the ones that have research done and the JW adherents that participate on the site usually begrudgingly accept the judgement of mods, even if they disagree with the answers. Almost every sect has its share of gotcha questions, I could think of thousands and these are useful as Peter Maurin would say, for the clarification of thought. Even worse than sectarian gotcha questions are Noah's Ark questions, these are not useful for the clarification of thought, we can all rally around our common dislike of those. So I would use as my guidepost when it comes to flagging gotcha questions (and I would suggest flagging them because they have a tendency to not get closed and get heavily answered) is whether it is more or less useful to clarify a particular doctrine than a random question about Noah's Ark.