18

These are on-topic so long as they can stick to "what Christian Creationists say about it." There can be no speculation or analyses of new science that is out. As this post says, we are not scientists and peer review is not the point of this site. The point is to lay down what Christians of all flavors teach, which includes Creationists, old and young ...


16

Yes, absolutely. The only caveat I would add is to make sure you ask specific questions. Don't throw out questions that would require sweeping generalizations to answer; include details about exactly what doctrines, churches and areas of history you want to learn about — things that can be answered with specific references and details.


12

There is a clear, quantifiable difference between the two. "What does the Bible say about a subject" leaves conflicting answers far too often. What does the Bible say the age of the earth is? What does the Bible say about whether Christians are required to tithe? What does the Bible say about free will? What does the Bible say about our ability to choose ...


12

the problem is that you are simply not operating within site guidelines. You ask questions that beg for opinion, and your answers give your opinions. Moderators and other users alike have attempted several times to explain this to you, and point you to the various Meta posts that try to explain the site guidelines, and either you are simply not getting it, ...


12

Questions here need to be ones that can have definitive answers, backed up with evidence, reason and references. How could anyone possibly interpret a dream definitively and back it up like that?


11

Considering the volume that we get of that, I'm okay with neglecting any taxonomic labels on it and just giving it a special close reason with a decent explanation for why we cannot (will not) answer questions like that, and hopefully alternatives or a meta post with alternatives. I thing something like: Questions asking why God takes one action or ...


8

Questions asking for the truth or validity of a particular doctrine or belief (aka Truth Questions), and questions asking Is X a Sin? are not a good fit for our site, due to their subjective nature, and the vast number of possible Christian opinions on such topics. See: We can't handle the truth


8

Short answer: NO Although it would seem like a great idea to document every different Denomination of Christianity, but it would take a lot of time and effort. Also the reason why there are so many of them, is because of all the different view points when it comes to the Christian faith. An example of the different viewpoints and how they vary is baptism....


8

I would suggest that this meta post is somewhat more alarmist than the situation calls for. I would also respectfully disagree with David's suggestion of blanket closure for post using this terminology. Even though I think it is an unfortunate side effect of ignorance and sloppy media usage, I do understand that term "cult" is commonly used as a pejorative, ...


8

Scoping should reflect the level of specificity required in the context of the question. "Protestants" should be considered valid if it is regarding something that is distinctive to the broad group of Protestants. An umbrella denomination (like "Reformed") should be used for something more distinctive but generally applicable to the Reformed denominations. ...


8

It's because this isn't a site about "what does the Bible say?" but rather about "what do Christians believe?" That may seem like an insignificant difference, but when you consider the literally thousands of different Christian churches, each with their own way of interpreting many of the same Bible verses, it becomes very significant indeed!


8

In short, because people disagree about what the Bible says. So rather than asking "What does the Bible say?" we ask "What does the Catholic church think the Bible says about this topic?" or "How do Protestants interpret this passage?" It may help to think of this site as primarily documenting (through questions and answers) the beliefs and practices of ...


7

I absolutely think it should be off-topic. And I would support it being included as an example in the "General philosophical or sociological questions" close description. It's a combination of opinion-based, general philosophical question, too broad, and Truth. At the bare minimum, it would be good to include it in the samples for "what not to ask" in the ...


7

Typically, I expect Stack Exchange websites to focus on verifiable answers; and I'm not sure that What does the Bible say about ... is typically verifiable—precisely because (as David says) people will say things like "Well, the Bible seems to be saying (or seems to me to be saying) such-and-such; but that's actually a metaphor—it's really ...


7

Maybe the site's name is deceiving, would something like "Christianity Study", "Christian Denominations", etc be more prudent? Even if the site's name doesn't change, we could just change the logo.


7

My two cents: This question appears to be asking whether a certain teaching or belief is true. Since there are various opinions on this topic, the question can be re-phrased as "who is right". "Who is right and who is wrong" is off-topic. We focus on what various groups teach, not whether what they teach is right. See: the help page, How we are ...


7

Although it's true that ID proponents don't use Christian terminology in their scientific work, there should be little doubt that ID is a form of Christian creationism. 1) Every leading ID proponent is a fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture (formerly the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture). Although the Discovery ...


7

Stack Exchange sites used to have a cookie cutter close reason for "Too Localized". Most of these questions fit the definition to a T. Although the close reason was bumped in favor of more common close reasons, I think the logic still applies. The idea behind SE sites isn't just to help one person once. The idea is to build a repository of question and ...


7

I am in favor I am in favor of adding "...that do not focus on what a specific denomination or tradition teaches" to the "Is X a sin?" definition and making such questions on-topic in that context. The final Help Center entry will read: is "X" a sin questions that ask whether a certain action or belief is sinful that do not focus on what a specific ...


6

I suggest rewriting the whole on topic section: the history of denominations (such as Roman Catholic, Anglican, Church of Christ or Later Day Saints) and movements (such as Pentecostalism, Creationism, Calvinism) explanations of the beliefs and practices of a denomination or movement the Biblical basis for a belief or practice


6

I don't think you can make it on-topic. On-topic questions include those asking about the history of denominations (such as Roman Catholic, Anglican, Church of Christ or Latter Day Saints) and movements (such as Pentecostalism, Creationism, Calvinism) understanding the Bible from the perspective of a specific viewpoint (like those listed above) ...


5

This is a case of the question title and body not matching. The body was clearly asking for the basis for this belief, whereas the title was truthy. I edited the title so now it's all good.


5

I deleted them. Each had been closed already, and each were far enough off-topic that there was little hope if editing them into shape. That's evidenced by the closure by the community and,the amount of down-votes. Cleaning up low quality content by deleting it is standard operating procedure on all StackExchange sites. In each case, I left a comment for ...


5

I created this query which tracks questions tagged with specific traditions for the past 12 months. Here is some of the data visualized (I've aggregated some of the tags and excluded others in the visualizations, you can see the actual data by viewing the query). De/limitations Does this mean that Roman Catholics are the largest user base here? I doubt it. ...


5

I would argue this falls squarely under "church management / administration." We had a discussion here: Broaden scope to include Church management? I'd argue that while we never had any consensus, the few church admin type questions we had got shot down. As such, I'd kind of like to resolve this, and I'd stick my vote for this should be on-topic Our site ...


5

Our policy on parenting.se is "opinions shared here should be backed up either with a reference, or experiences that happened to you personally". In practice, this rule is not referenced very often. It occasionally comes up when an extreme stance or blanket statement is made without any obvious or intuitive support (e.g. "all kids study harder when they ...


5

Neither of the other answers mentions the "overview" type of question, which is certainly applicable in many questions asking "what do Protestants believe?" A question like "What do Protestants believe about the unforgivable sin?" is too broad, because Protestants of different traditions believe different things about the unforgivable sin. However, a ...


5

I like the questions. They're very practical. There's two issues however: They may be too localized. In other words they are very specific and therefore may help nobody other than the person asking. It seems like information that could change on a whim and no one would know. I'm willing to overlook these two things, but the rest of the community may not.


4

Abstract Bible questions should be redirected to Biblical Hermeneutics unless they are doctrine questions in disguise. Those should be couched in terms of the doctrine they are addressing, not in terms of the Bible directly. Unless the question is literally asking for a trivial search of the Bible, in which case the question needs to be closed. The Bible ...


4

I'm going to go against the grain and recommend that we handle these on a case-by-case basis, but that we lean toward making these off-topic, and direct those users to chat. (If they have sufficient reputation to chat, that is.) Initially, I agreed with @Fredsbend's take on this, since our usual advice for keeping things constructive is to limit discussion ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible