10

One of the ways Christianity.SE avoids those flame wars is to insist that answers say what whole groups or denominations believe is the truth rather than saying what is the truth on a particular topic. What is the truth is a matter of opinion, and there are almost as many opinions as there are people. allowing such "truth" questions and answers leads to ...


10

tl;dr> Yes and No. Yes, it is helpful when answers specify the tradition, but no, we don't want those kinds of questions in the first place. Ideally, the question is going to be scoped to a particular theological framework. Answers that match are valid, answers that don't aren't. Getting all possible answers is often too broad and cumbersome, and not well ...


8

I respectfully disagree with Fredsbend. There is a massive difference between what this community regards as 'a truth question' and an on-topic question regarding a denominational or doctrinal perspective on 'truth'. In my view, it is entirely legitimate to have the 'truth' tag for the purpose of the latter. Examples: What is the biblical support that the ...


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.


6

TL;DR No. This would be encouraging a class of question often referred to as a "list question", which is heavily discouraged. It also encourages voting wars, which is one of the principal things we aim to avoid by prohibiting "Truth questions." So rather than asking "Is Jesus eternally God?" then receiving 75 answers with vote ...


6

Trinitarian is generally too broad in my opinion unless the question specifically address the concept of the Trinity. If the question asks him Trinitarians address the theory of evolution, that's not properly scoped. If the question asks whether Trinitarians agree that John 1 indicates that Jesus the Son and God the Father are one and The same, that's ...


6

I think it is a question answerable from scripture with no need to interject opinion. This is a common misunderstanding, but answering anything from scripture requires interpretation and some degree of application. Whether you see this as interjecting opinion or not, the interpretive framework you use will come across in the result and an answer from ...


5

When it comes to questions of "why", there is essentially no such thing as a purely objective scriptural question because Scripture can be and is interpreted in an extremely wide variety of ways. Trying to discern the mind of God just exacerbates the problem. Thus, in its current form, the question should remain on hold. Consider the posted close reason (...


4

Note that on PPCG questions are either explicitly popularity contests, or the competition is won according to the objective rules as adjudicated by the catalogue snippet while the voting is for unofficial popularity. There is no parallel way of objectively judging answers on this site, which means we could only ever have popularity contests here. That's why ...


4

This was tried in the early days of the site. The result makes a mockery of the SE voting system. Instead of the most informative, useful, and high quality answer content getting voted to the top the voting represented whatever view was most popular among the active user base. Good content was getting down voted because people didn't happen to agree with the ...


4

Answer take 2. Because I missed the point the first time around. This meta post seems to have gotten started of all the wrong foot by ⓐ talking about the problem being whether the topic was too bread or narrow and ⓑ dragging a bunch of sectarian terminology into the discussion as if it mattered. As far as I can tell the only real question here is whether ...


4

Question scope is not limited to just groups that have some authority in place. Any doctrinal position can function to define the scope of a question. What types of questions this is appropriate for varies by context, but it is workable. True, there is not "authority" on Trinitarianism. But there is very broad agreement on it. As such those that hold a ...


4

You wrote something is this meta post that is a huge red flag suggesting the question should not, in fact, be re-opened: I would like to see more answers that address other views. This sites's Q&A format is not well suited to polling for assorted views. If that's what you hope to get out of a question then you're doing it wrong. Overview questions ...


4

I agree with Flimzy and Affable Geek and the reasons they gave. Let me offer one more reason to support that viewpoint. One thing that makes such truth questions "too broad" is the fact that they quickly amass many many answers. It becomes very hard to sift through and can become (as alluded to in the other answers) a popularity contest for the "best" ...


3

So my perspective is that there are several levels of interpretation. It's hard to split them, up, but here is my go: Word definitions, syntax questions (ex. what does the crazy old-timey KJV syntax of this verse mean?) Identifying referents (ex. who is the king mentioned in this verse?) What is the point of this verse, or what is the basic doctrine it ...


3

David Stratton commented: ...I worry that the tongue-in-cheek title conveys the wrong message. We old-timers get it, but newcomers may not, and that's what we're trying to avoid. Also, I'd like to suggest another link for the "Further reading" section. I hope this doesn't sound too self-serving and self-promoting, but I really like Tips for ...


2

All exegetical questions less than 60 days old which have no tradition specified should be flagged for a moderator requesting that they be moved to the Hermeneutics Stack Exchange if they are on-topic for the site, not too broad and not primarily opinion based. Questions older than 60 days should be closed or edited to re-scope them or bring them on topic (...


2

Short answer. There should not be. There are were only ten questions with that tag, and tags that are unused are deleted every day. The answer here is to edit the tag off of the questions that contain it, then wait a day. The tag will then be deleted. Also, whoever happens to be removing the tag should make a close vote too if the question happens to be off-...


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