« first day (1980 days earlier)   

12:35 AM
A. It's one of St. Francis' most popular extant works. 2. Pope Francis quoted it extensively in laudatio si. iii. I ran in to a practical problem using it in my catechism class
 
 
2 hours later…
2:42 AM
@DickHarfield Do you think "critical scholars" will largely agree on the answer to this question? Wouldn't the theological background of such scholars play a role?
That is, I'd imagine that a Catholic "critical scholar" would answer differently from a deist "critical scholar," even if both self-identified as Christians.
 
 
2 hours later…
4:34 AM
@Nathaniel Your question to me probably relates to the question "What could explain the tenth Egyptian plague?"
@Nathaniel I do tend to find there is often a consensus among critical scholars, because they are all looking at the same data and generally using the same hermeneutic methods, at the same time trying to keep personal religious beliefs out of it. So, from that point of view, any one question may be answerable by a (partial) consensus of scholars.
@Nathaniel OOPs I just realised you had the question about the Trinity in mind ... sorry about that :)
@Nathaniel Returning to my train of thought ... Nevertheless, I was not saying that would be the case in this instance, merely that this would be a possibility the OP could consider. I was not leading him, merely trying to explain how the site works and how he can ask a good question.
It is also possible to to ask the views of a subset of critical scholars. I (vaguely) remember a recent question about the Acts Seminar, which had only about 100 voting members.
 
 
11 hours later…
3:38 PM
@DickHarfield Okay, fair enough. I think that can make sense for many questions, especially exegesis questions, but I'm not sure about that particular one.
@Caleb I'm realizing that I'm being inconsistent with this answer and this one. Perhaps it's my answer that needs to improve, or do you think I'm being too demanding on the other answer?
 
@Nathaniel I'm not sure I quite follow you.
 
Sorry – I gave an answer that didn't provide the resource that someone wanted, and I didn't make much of a case for the non-existence of that resource. But then I critiqued someone else's answer for doing something similar.
It seems that I'm holding myself to a lower standard of what it takes to prove a negative than others, and I'm thinking through what that standard ought to be.
 
@Nathaniel Oh right. So my take on that is sometimes people are asking for things that don't exist and in a lot of cases a "near miss" is actually helpful as an answer. As long as the question is specific enough so that allowing such answers doesn't mushroom into a free for all, I'd say answers that give something close (and preferably explain why only a close match is possible) is fine.
As such I think your answer is fine. The JW one is marginal, but not enough that I would mod-delete it. It's in the balpark and probably quite useful to the OP. Also since he doesn't attack the JW belief in question only show some similarities between it and something else, it seemed fine to me.
At least from a moderator perspective. Whether it deserves up or down votes I'm not sure (I've done neither yet) but it doesn't seem to need the ax.
But there is no formula for this. If it had been a Catholic question and some Protestant was trying to make a case that Lutherans were close enough to fit the bill I'd probably have brought out the delete hammer.
 
3:55 PM
@Caleb OK, that's helpful. I know some meta discussion has touched on this but I need to further consider how I'm evaluating these.
 
@Nathaniel Also if that answer had smelled any more as if he was promoting rather than describing 7thDA views in relation to the question I probably would have done something different.
 
Right, that makes sense. His tone seems to indicate that he is attempting to answer the question, even though he doesn't devote much effort to proving the negative.
Ah, but now his latest comment suggests that there are real examples! Interesting.
 
4:31 PM
@Nathaniel If he follows through per his last comment this could be the makings of a good answer.
 
Yes indeed; that's great.
 
 
4 hours later…
8:58 PM
0
Q: Why were bloody religious wars so incredibly frequent in Europe in the century following the Reformation?

George A. StriebyBeginning in 1520, right after Martin Luther's Reformation, bloody religious wars began that kept recurring almost yearly for over a century. The Reformation's rapid spread drew battle lines accross Europe as Catholic armies were fielded to crush the Protestants into submission, engulfing the con...

 

« first day (1980 days earlier)