2

From a comment by Peter Turner on another question:

"It's not a Christian website either, it's a secular website about Christianity"

I have read a few Question/Answer/Comments about this topic on this site, and am finally coming around a bit. However, I still have what I feel are valid issues:

The Name

If I, as a Christian, wanted to explore Islam, I would want to check out the islam.stackexchange site and be grateful for objective knowledge about the topic from the perspective of adherents AND academics, with no intention of becoming an adherent. But as a Christian, I would NOT want to explore the christianity.stackexchange site and be told it is only for academics and the adherents need to disguise themselves as academics, which is how I feel I am treated. In "Should we say we are a 'secular website'?" I do like Lee Woofenden's suggestion that the site would serve potential members better with a clear reference to "about" before christianity, which would suggest it is not "for" christianity. I agree with DJClayworth's assessment that "secular" is a loaded trigger word for many people, and is off-putting to at least some of the Christians using the site. The academics should not be able to decree that it is a good and proper use of the word here as some have done in other comments.

The concept

The debate about "secular" or "christian" views seems to describe two different goals for using the site. The first and foremost user is the person exploring the topic as a religious studies class, keeping the material at arm's length, with no interest other than intellectual curiosity. The second user may or may not be an adherent, but is interested in learning if this topic could possibly become a belief system to live by. Both should be equally respected and understood as having different approaches to Q&As (although I agree all discussions should apply in a public way, not to address a person's unique life issue).

My concerns

In the comments to my first and so far only question "Does Predestination apply to all people or just the major characters God needed for His plans for us to unfold?":

  1. Ray Butterworth told me the site is not religious, it is about religion, and went on to say

    "Ideally good answers will be the same regardless of one's personal beliefs Q&As should be about what is objectively true for people of all faiths".

    But this makes no sense to me, because part A would restrict discussion to an extremely limited range of ideas that have no room for interpretation, and for part B there will be almost no Q&As that would be considered true in more than a few common faiths, if that. Otherwise, why so many different faiths?

  2. curiousdannii told me that my question was moot because

    "most Christians from most denominations are compatibilist - upholding both the sovereignty of God, and humans having real wills".

    But this seems like a cop-out, because the question is trying to determine when does God gets to decide versus when do people get to decide. Saying that God and people both get to decide will obviously create conflict between people and God when they both think they can decide.

  1. NigelJ said

    "The question appears not to be seeking what God has revealed of Himself (in his own word). Therefore it becomes a philosophical enquiry, inviting philosophical debate, in order to come to a human concensus of opinion, all of which are off-topic on this site".

    But my question referred to many Bible verses, and asked for help with clarification. The only person that answered it (so far) used many Bible verses in his answer, and I commended him for using source material and referred to some of it in my reply to him. I was not trying to get "consensus of opinion" or invite "philosophical debate", and I carefully restricted the question to what God HAS revealed about himself in His Book.

A mildly ironic observation made with respect: The word "philosophy" is Greek for "love of wisdom", the Google definition (from Oxford Languages) is "the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline". An adherent to Christianity understands this refers to the type of wisdom gained from the study of human-derived knowledge, as in academia. This seems to pretty accurately describe the primary "keep it at an arm's length" type of site user I described above, but NigelJ says such usage of the site is off topic...

9
  • 1
    Great question. I am experiencing the same push back from mostly the same names you list. As it stands, the rules kept in place by this authoritative structure, are in no way intended to sharped iron. They are in place to keep the watered down versions of many false gospels from false spirits, discussed as equal to the 1 Truth. Understand this place has nothing to do with the Kingdom, but instead is actively working against it.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 15:17
  • I will post a question soon. This site is not concerned with arriving closer to the 1 Truth. Its a popularity contest where the questions and answers are deceptively filtered by edits stemming from the over-reaching threat of being closed or down voted. The path to the narrow gate is where Truth can be found. The broad road is where you will find the popular interpretations lifted up here.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 16:15
  • @Read, yes this site is mainly for academics, who prefer developing knowledge in the Greek tradition of library building through discussion with each other and study of famous historians of similar beliefs ("horizontal" relationships between people FIRST). It has no desire to actually help people understand God's plan for revealing Himself to us ("vertical" relationship with HIM first). "Book" smart people busying themselves with floods of ideas about God can be distracted away from learning the truth of who He is and what He wants for/from us.
    – jKevinBarr
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:40
  • I'm about ready to dust off my sandals from this place of lies and start my own SE that lets the freedom of the Spirit speak untethered.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:42
  • 1
    @Read, so I am a "street" smart person who has experiential knowledge of what happens when I follow or ignore God guiding me through my conscience, which gives me discernment that a purely academic student doesn't have. There are people on this site that are a blend of both, which would seem like an advantage when interpreting Scripture, but the Spiritual approach should take precedence.
    – jKevinBarr
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:44
  • 1
    @Read, this site does have a corporate owner that tries to be politically correct with respect to offending people of alternative beliefs, so it is safer to take the view here that academic study is ok, but proselytizing probably will cause problems... Even other Stackexchange topics like music for instance, which is incredibly subjective, seems to attract mostly people with college educations formally discussing theory and history etc. It's what Stackexchange is...
    – jKevinBarr
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:48
  • That is in no way what Christianity is. The topic of this SE. Absurd.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:50
  • @Read yep, like my reference in my question that the site should state it is "about" Christianity, not "for" Christianity. Not sure if I wrote this in this question already, but my point was a "library" has sections for academics doing research, and for the general public looking for knowledge in the non fiction and even some fiction aisles (like C.S. Lewis). A good librarian would steer people to what they want, and no patron would be turned away. But this site only wants the academics. God could change that, since He hasn't, He must have other ways for us to learn and share!
    – jKevinBarr
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:56
  • He does! I've learned everything from His 1 Spirit of the Truth He shares through the Risen Son....Exactly as we are told it happens......Which is why btw, I have come to different conclusions than those who only rely on the man made knowledge. They can't even see their own ignorance.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 19:59

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
2

The website is secular because it is hosted by a corporation that is entirely worldly. Islam.se (not to mention the Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist sites) should be a secular site for the same reason. I'm not sure how they were able to avoid being told to come up with a framework to deal with sectarian conflicts.

The answer, originally, was that we called these questions that only God could answer "Truth Questions" and closed them accordingly. At some point, a few years ago now, I merged the "Truth Question" (which really confused new users) with "Philosophical/Sociological" which only minorly confused new users.

But the gist of it is the same:

  • if the question can only be answered by God,
  • and the question is not an appeal to a religious authority

then the question is off topic.

If I were mod on Islam.SE, for instance, I would close all these questions

5
  • Thank you, Peter. The semantics of picking words to describe how the site works is difficult, (I still don't like "secular" as mentioned). Since God is Spirit, if you accept my definition of philosophy then philosophy.christianity.se seems like a juxtaposition. A philosophical approach to discussing religion seems a bit like limiting a description of the wind to measuring how much the leaves move. I would also want to see knowledge from someone who has experienced the wind blowing on their face. In a comment to @GratefulDisciple I pointed out that a library would include books from both.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 14:23
  • I like your very concise gist. But reading God's Book requires asking Him (and other believers, scholarly or lay) for clarification. @GratefulDisciple has pointed out that an "overview" question could be asked, to solicit basic responses from many types of site users, then a new, properly scoped question could be steered to a specific religious authority. This seems like the best way to use the site, although I am still unnerved by the need to remain objective at the possible expense of losing Spiritual discernment.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 14:36
  • I apologize to you and @GratefulDisciple if I come across as overly contrarian. I would like to concede that this site's approach to sharing knowledge is far above the ones I see at Quora or Yahoo, where it can be hard to filter out the answers provided by people just enjoying their soapbox moment in the sun. Thank you for what you do here.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 14:43
  • @jKevinBarr yeah, until you've got more reputation and can see all the deleted posts, you might not be able to appreciate the curation work that the community does by flagging posts that don't belong (it would be great if it were possible on other sites, maybe it is or maybe they're just more complacent). I would caution against overview questions though. Jacks of all trades are often masters of no nuances. You don't really miss out on anything by asking 3 or 4 questions of the different major Christian denominations over the course of a week.
    – Peter Turner Mod
    Sep 27, 2022 at 15:56
  • "Truth questions" So you close down GOOD questions based on the non-biblical assertion that Truth can not be known? What? Seek and you will find. Is this not the place where the Spirit of Truth reveals.... You are right though... This website is 100% babylon. It uses the Babylonian game of word play and censorship as a means to cloud the Truth of the gospel.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 15:12
2

About the site

You're almost there in figuring out the purpose of C.SE. Yes, it is a religious studies site about Christianity, but apart from the topic there's one more requirement: ability to be answered objectively, which has 2 consequences:

  1. Where one Christian group potentially has a different answer, then the Q has to specify which group the question is seeking (unless it's an overview question).

  2. If no Christian group has a "correct" answer (i.e. there are multiple opinions) then the Q cannot be asked in this site, even though the Question is spiritually significant (such as "What is the meaning of life", "How do I discern God's plan for my life", "What are the principles I can follow to find my future spouse", "Why a good God allows an innocent baby to be murdered", etc.). These would typically be questions you would ask your pastor. See also We can't handle the truth.

About your specific concerns

  1. But this makes no sense to me, because part A would restrict discussion to an extremely limited range of ideas that have no room for interpretation, and for part B there will be almost no Q&As that would be considered true in more than a few common faiths, if that. Otherwise, why so many different faiths?

    This is not a site to discuss the relative merit of the view of different Christian groups. Rather, it's a site to help us learn where a particular Christian group stands for a particular issue. If you read the entirety of Ray Butterworth's comment "true for people of all faiths" does not mean an answer that is satisfactory for all faiths, but an answer by a specific group phrased in an objective manner so it can be understood without confusion by all faiths. For example, a question asking the nature of the Eucharist according to Catholicism can be answered in a way that all denominations agree that it IS a Catholic answer (i.e. not misrepresenting Catholicism).

  2. But this seems like a cop-out, because the question is trying to determine when does God gets to decide versus when do people get to decide. Saying that God and people both get to decide will obviously create conflict between people and God when they both think they can decide.

    Conflict is not necessarily the case here. Jesus (as paradigmatic, exemplary, and ideal representative of a human person) was able to unite his will with the Father's will. As brother/sister of Jesus, we can do this too, with the grace of the Holy Spirit. This type of "unified will in love" preserves both human free will and God's providence. Different Christian groups simply have different models of how this interaction plays out within God's Eternal Now (where all times are present to Him). A few short videos that helped me a lot:

  3. But my question referred to many Bible verses, and asked for help with clarification. The only person that answered it (so far) used many Bible verses in his answer, and I commended him for using source material and referred to some of it in my reply to him. I was not trying to get "consensus of opinion" or invite "philosophical debate", and I carefully restricted the question to what God HAS revealed about himself in His Book.

    It's the sad truth that Biblical revelation is incomplete and ambiguous on some relatively unimportant issues. It's God's choice and we have to deal with insufficient information. This of course leads to multiple interpretations of what the Bible say (since one has to fill in the blanks or has to reconcile seemingly contradictory statements in different ways). What's the consequence for this site? Since this site's goal is objective answer, this requires the question to be scoped accordingly (see first section above).

Conclusion

But aren't we supposed to gain wisdom by studying the Bible and obtain God's truths for us to follow? YES, OF COURSE. How does a Christian gain any value from this site? Answer: by studying the clear objectively described Biblical interpretive choices before him/her in this "marketplace of Christian groups", and by prayerfully decide subjectively which choice to adopt personally.

I hope this answer helps. If not, please comment and I'll try to improve this meta answer further.

11
  • What an excellent answer, Thank You @GratefulDisciple! The first two links to other questions you provide should be part of an orientation for all new users. I see how questions like mine should be presented as an "overview", so that different types of objective, peer accepted but basic answers can be provided. Then if an answer appeals to me, I can ask a new question that is scoped for the specific scholar/adherent's offering to gain more specific knowledge.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 13:14
  • @jKevinBarr Glad I could help. Yes, that approach can work. Don't forget to search for existing answers, as this site has been around for more than 10 years. SE sites also try to keep duplicate questions to a minimum, for SE site is a Knowledge Base site, not a discussion forum like Reddit. It took me a while to understand how to use (and contribute to) this site, but it's worth the effort !
    – GratefulDisciple
    Sep 27, 2022 at 13:19
  • 1
    I think this format works well for most topics but maybe struggles for subjects that require a faith/spiritual baseline to start from. If I ask "How do I install a ceiling fan", moderators will tell me to scope the question, as in "What is the proper way to install a 35 pound ceiling fan if the joists are further apart than the building codes in Sarasota, Fl. specify?". An answer may include "remember to measure twice and cut once!" which will be condemned as opinion not found in the written codes. So the asker may end up measuring once then cutting twice, which could have been avoided.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 13:34
  • So it seems there should be some wiggle room for allowing "street smarts" people to complement the purely objective, research-based, peer accepted "book smarts" peoples' answers. A library will have books that approach a topic from both perspectives, isn't this site about increasing and exposing the library of man's knowledge? And a librarian will attempt to help any customer that wants to be pointed to knowledge, not just the ones that know how to ask a scholarly question.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 13:41
  • If I go to the islam.stackexchange site and ask for clarification on a topic that has a similarity or difference to a concept I have studied in Judaism or Christianity, I want access to spiritual insight from a lifelong "street smarts" type of Muslim that can explain their understanding along with a theologian's accredited writings. It seems difficult to use this site in that way. I certainly do appreciate the difficulties of this, perhaps each answer provider should state their type of authority in their profile?
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 13:52
  • @jKevinBarr The "wiggle room" is 1) doing initial search; 2) read the Tour and the help pages; 3) attempts to post a Q and regular visitors comment on your Q to help you; 4) chat rooms like The Upper room.
    – GratefulDisciple
    Sep 27, 2022 at 13:57
  • @jKevinBarr Yes, I can imagine I would be having a hard time going to Islam.SE, or even Judaism.SE (I couldn't believe how different Christians are from them until I went there even though we share their Hebrew Bible which we renamed OT !! ). Unfortunately some basic understanding of Christianity is assumed, hence prior research. So I probably would go to Islam.SE chatroom for guidance.
    – GratefulDisciple
    Sep 27, 2022 at 14:00
  • 1
    @jKevinBarr "perhaps each answer provider should state their type of authority in their profile?" "authority" / "competence" of an answer provider is exhibited by their tags/badges rather than their official affiliation. Much depends on the "rightness" of the votes. Those who vote are implicitly empowered to say whether a certain answer speaks correctly for a certain group or not. It's not a perfect system, but over the years it seems to work that the higher voted answer do reflect the group asked for in the Q.
    – GratefulDisciple
    Sep 27, 2022 at 14:03
  • The problem is apparent from the introduction and premise of your answer. You say a good question needs to be "answered objectively". If that were the case then ideally we'd all be arriving at the same 1 objective Truth of the gospels revealed by the 1 Spirit. Unfortunately, the rules in place here are premised by a false truth that this is impossible....You say, yourself, that there are multiple CHRISTIAN views and we need to cater to all the false spirits within that word.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 15:26
  • @ReadLessPrayMore I understand your concern. We need to distinguish between how a candidate of truth is presented (which can be objective: 2 or more people can agree on the meaning of a position) and whether a position IS the truth in objective reality from God's point of view (where there are multiple claimants in our world: example, one group says Reformed is the truth while another says Catholicism is the truth). C.SE deals with the presentation, leaving to individual subjective judgment (with the help of the Holy Spirit) to determine for themselves which one to believe.
    – GratefulDisciple
    Oct 17, 2022 at 12:08
  • @ReadLessPrayMore Therefore, while C.SE effectively becomes a place to share several Christian positions that some would regard as to be influenced by false spirits, we leave to a reader's judgment whether to accept all or some or one or no positions as informed by the true Holy Spirit. C.SE then provides a space to clearly enunciate multiple positions in an objective manner and presentation. I'm not endorsing Fox News, but their slogan is: "We Report, You Decide".
    – GratefulDisciple
    Oct 17, 2022 at 12:15
1

"Ideally good answers will be the same regardless of one's personal beliefs Q&As should be about what is objectively true for people of all faiths".

But this makes no sense to me, because part A would restrict discussion to an extremely limited range of ideas that have no room for interpretation

Surprisingly, no. I, as an atheist, have answered questions about what Jehovah's Witnesses believe. What I believe wasn't the subject of the question, and therefore wasn't really mentioned in the answer.

I've asked questions about Catholic doctrine. I didn't really mind who provided the answer, but I wanted an answer about Catholic doctrine, not the personal beliefs of whoever felt like providing them.

This is why questions should be scoped. You shouldn't ask the world at large for their personal beliefs on a topic. (Though by all means do so in chat, which is rather different.) Instead, ask a specific question of a specific group. It's most likely that a member of that group will answer, and their answers will probably be better informed and better quality, but in principle anyone can answer.

And anyone providing their own personal beliefs instead is simply not answering the question asked, and their contributions are therefore unwelcome and can be deleted.

So we can still discuss all kinds of complex (and controversial) topics. We just need to scope the questions carefully.

10
  • Thanks, I think I am starting to understand. If I ask "Can I make a left turn from Euclid St. directly into the McDonald's parking lot", ideally a factual answer from an employee there would have more merit, but anybody who has actually driven there can provide an accurate answer, and they ideally would all match. If I ask "How do I get to the McDonald's on Euclid St", my question should be rejected because it will encourage vague answers from people who want to share their shortcuts or look it up on a maps app but not notice the street has a divider so no left turn is possible, etc.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 18:33
  • If I wanted help with building a bird house, I could solicit answers from specific experts about weather resistance of materials, suggested roof slope for various climates, size of hole for different birds etc., but I should not expect any sample designs or pictures of finished birdhouses. If I ask an overview question about following a cloud out of Egypt, I may get basic ideas about the Bible references from different authorities. If I follow up with one intriguing source, I may get expert descriptions of cloud types but no reasons for why one cloud may be God's.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 18:45
  • I like the metaphor. I must admit that I've never really got the hang of overview questions. (Also, I'm not here nearly as much as I used to be, so my intuitions about how this place works, and any advice I may give, may be a little out of date at times.)
    – TRiG
    Sep 27, 2022 at 18:47
  • So the site is a valuable resource for looking up objectively scrutinized factual information but not so good at getting advice from people with rubber-meets-the-road experience. In other comments for this question I have wondered why this site cannot function like an actual library, which has different areas for scholarly research and general reference and even for writers of useful fiction (like C.S. Lewis for example).
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 18:55
  • The librarian's job is to direct patrons to the different sections' information on the topic the patron asks for. And the librarian would attempt to help anybody, not just the patrons that know how to ask a scholarly question.
    – jKevinBarr
    Sep 27, 2022 at 18:56
  • Yes... exactly....Why is an athiest's opinion on the topic of Christ, protected above the pursuit of the 1 Truth of the gospels? No offense, but our master, Jesus Christ, says that all Truth comes from the Spirit of God, so how can we take your answers seriously on this forum?
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 16, 2022 at 15:30
  • I've rarely had occasion to give my opinion in answers here, @ReadLessPrayMore, on Christ or on anything else. This site isn't about asking for personal opinions. (I do in chat, sometimes vigorously, but chat is a different place, related but distinct.)
    – TRiG
    Oct 17, 2022 at 15:39
  • Right... but how can those who fancy themselves Christians take any word coming out of your mouth as truth? If we believe what our master says. Then your words have zero weight in how we see reality. No offense.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 17, 2022 at 16:01
  • My point is: As a community of mostly self proclaimed Christians here... Why are we catering to atheists if the goal is to put forward the best answer which is what Christians SHOULD believe is the most TRUE.
    – Read Less Pray More
    Oct 17, 2022 at 16:03
  • "Should" is not part of the vocabulary here.
    – TRiG
    Oct 17, 2022 at 16:11

You must log in to answer this question.

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