« first day (13 days earlier)      last day (4617 days later) » 
02:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

2:49 AM
Hello @Flimzy!
 
Hey
 
not much... just checking in...
Are things going better here yet?
 
3:03 AM
@Flimzy ...define "things" and "better"? :P
 
hehe
If you need those terms defined, then it sounds like the answer is probably no
 
3:18 AM
@Flimzy Not necessarily...the answer could be neither yes nor no. :P
 
And how exactly would THAT work?
 
3:36 AM
In the sense that things got neither better nor worse? :P
 
But my question was "Did things get better?" so if they got neither better nor worse, then the answer is "no" :)
 
@Flimzy Oh, you just HAD to choose a binary set of choices, not a trinary one... :P
 
hehe
 
3:55 AM
Can we get a "Straw man" flag for questions?
 
4:06 AM
@Flimzy meaning what? - like what do you mean by a straw man flag?
also, perhaps post as a feature request on Meta.Christianity
 
@studiohack You know what a straw man argument is, right?
@Flimzy Lol.
 
@ElendiaStarman I don't understand how it would apply to flags
 
@studiohack Well, it's basically setting up a target for yourself so that you can strike it down with great justice.
In this case, posting questions that are basically just targets for expressing a particular viewpoint or another.
 
@studiohack: I'm not being serious. "Not a real question" already covers that case.
 
@ElendiaStarman which is expressly allowed in the FAQ - to ask questions that we can answer ourselves as well
 
4:09 AM
Or rather...not really targets...but where you attack something within the question.
 
@studiohack: Asking rhetorical questions is not at ALL the same as a straw man.
 
@ElendiaStarman I would close that as a not constructive
 
A straw man is when you say "My opponent says X. X is obviously wrong, because of A B and C"
When your opponent never said X
 
like putting something in someone's mouth that they never said @Flimzy?
 
Yeah, essentially.
An example might be "Why do Christians say that anyone who drinks coolade is going to Hell?"
 
4:11 AM
ah I get it...okay
 
Christians don't say that
Or at least nowhere near a majority say that :)
 
right
 
Of course usually the debater tries something a bit closer to what Christians actually do say.
 
Well, Flimzy explained it way better than I did. :P
 
It's done all the time in politics... and on Fox news.
If you ever want to learn dirty debate tactics, just watch FOX News.
They're experts.
 
4:13 AM
thanks @Flimzy & @ElendiaStarman
 
@studiohack You're welcome. :)
Woah...we now have 527 visitors per day. That's quite a jump from ~250 just a couple days ago!
 
that's awesome!
 
...y'know...I think the SE team could totally graduate this site after just a month or two. It's hardly two weeks old and already we're fast approaching the numbers for a healthy beta... :P
 
4:30 AM
Don't they have a 6-month minimum?
I think it's not known yet whether this site will continue to generate interest for months... or if there's just a surge from going public
 
@Flimzy I believe it's actually 3. I was a bit joking.
 
 
4 hours later…
8:27 AM
@user unknown this is the second time you're questioning the importance of a question I asked: christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/2109/…
@user unknown I'm not very sure if going around asking that is constructive
 
@dancek I don't think he was recently in this chat, so the @ won't notify him
 
@Fabian oh, I thought you could ping anyone like that :/
 
@dancek Only mods can ;-)
 
Ok, commented with a link here
 
I wouldn't worry too much about him, he doesn't seem to even believe in a God and most of his answers are not related to the question, they are just various rants about how God is a figment.
 
8:39 AM
Just flag the comment and it will likely be deleted soon
 
8:53 AM
0
Q: Is "Bible In a Minute" accurate?

dancekThe Bible In a Minute video by Barats and Bereta has been enormously popular on YouTube, with 3.6 million viewers. The video quite literally goes through the Bible in less than a minute. Obviously, the video leaves out a lot. But as for what is included: Is it accurate? Is it enough? Consider ...

 
9:20 AM
Comment on deleted post: "Trolling. Funny, but still trolling. Also not an answer."
 
10:13 AM
What's the use anyway? By 9 am I was out of votes and hit the rep cap. Our SE overlords are actually communists not secularists.
All I can do now is wave my rebel flags at them.
 
mmmm, /me got mod tools
now at exactly 2,000 rep. can't afford to downvote.
 
Ha ha, that would be funny to loose mod tools over a single downvote.
You could always get them back by accepting an answer :)
 
@Caleb yeah, just kidding anyway :)
 
@dancek Ya, I know ;) I was just looking at the leader board myself.
I am second in everything.
 
@Caleb yeah... I'm astonished how well you and Mason Wheeler are keeping active.
 
10:40 AM
Is it considered feeding trolls to give them lists of verses when they demand references?
 
11:07 AM
0
Q: Can man judge whether God is fair?

CalebOver and over I hear people pronouncing in one way or another that God is "not fair"*. Sometimes this is stated directly, other times indirectly as in "that doesn't seem fair, therefore God must not be that way." My question is, are we humans in a position to judge whether God is fair or not? If...

 
11:29 AM
@Caleb did you intend to narrow this question down: christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/861/…
 
@dancek Wow obviously I did but how I intended to escapes me at the moment. I'm pretty sure I had a specific idea, I'll put my thinking cap back on and see if I can remember what it was.
 
:)
 
@dancek Apparently @waxeagle isn't the only one that has episodes of "what was Caleb thinking?"
 
@Caleb :D
 
@Caleb lol
I'm trying to remember what that was :)
 
11:45 AM
Wow, I'm one vote away from Good Answer.
 
@dancek awesome. Good badges are tough :).
 
@waxeagle Granny smith ring any bells?
 
@Caleb lol right :)
my mind is a bit foggy this morning, my whole day has been thrown off course.
thanks to flooding and a 2 hour delay I'm at home watching Disney Junior with my toddler...
 
@dancek Already upvoted that a long time ago :)
Sounds like your making the best of it.
 
@Caleb yeah, I expect that the most active users have upvoted
 
11:57 AM
I'm a bit surprised I didn't wake up to like 5-10 replies on some of the posts I made yesterday, instead I woke up to 100 rep :)
 
Good morning
 
@DTest Good morning
 
@waxeagle good times for an excuse to watch Disney. Hope you didn't get any damage.
 
@DTest nah, we are find. We live on top of a mountain :). But a lot of the valley seems to be flooded and there are some road closures to work around. Hopefully we are heading out in about an hour.
I can do some work from home, but our email server is down (thankfully not my job).....
 
@waxeagle I've been surprised before too ... I fully expected to get piled on the other night and only had objection and a legitimate one at that.
However judging from a few of the other posts, I think the trolls are having more fun going at each others strawmen.
 
12:06 PM
@Caleb nice. I was expecting a reply on my Lev 14 post...
@Caleb yeah, its nice when they fight amongst themselves :)
 
@waxeagle We'll call it the Gandalf tactic.
 
@Caleb nice, I haven't read the Hobbit in years...I should reread it soon
thinks about the backlog of books he needs to read
 
@waxeagle The silence there was kind of un-nerving. Good answer though.
 
@Caleb thanks. I think the "this is out of context" kind of silenced them :)
 
If you were editting this sentence: "When he was hanged on cross", would you change it to 'nailed on the cross', or just correct the tense: "hung on the cross" ?
 
12:12 PM
@DTest shouldn't matter, nailed is more graphic
 
@waxeagle Well, it was :) And back in context it can still be literal without being a bronze age magic potion.
Real Bible literalists read the whole passage.
 
if you are editing someone else's words you might choose to use hung just to keep the same level of graphicness...
@Caleb exactly.
although I'm not sure I consider myself a bible "literalist" at least not in the full meaning of the word....
 
@waxeagle that's what I thought as well, just checking.
 
@waxeagle Neither am I, that was tongue in cheek.
 
@Caleb gotcha, no caffeine yet this morning, sarcasm detector broken...currently fueling with Dr. Pepper...
 
12:20 PM
Hmm, my pastor recently said Dr. Pepper was "of the Devil"...That night at small group dinner, I tested that theory with a Dr. Pepper. He wasn't amused
 
@DTest :). Dr. Pepper is nectar from God, can't possibly be of the devil :). Also whatever mojo they have that makes the diet taste just like the real thing has to be a miracle :)
 
Speaking of devil, can someone explain me, why god does not "limit" the devil?
 
@BeatMe He does :)
 
@BeatMe yes, go read the first part of Job
 
@BeatMe I started to touch on that here but that could actually be a really good question on it's own. Care to ask?
 
12:28 PM
@caleb your pseudo code in that answer and the 'dont feed the trolls' aspect of proverbs makes me think someone should develop a programmer/internet-jargon type translation of the Bible.
 
@DTest That would be an amusing project. A sort of Bible application study notes column for the SE community.
 
@Caleb It could be the C.SE blog :) or at least a topic therein. The breakdown - biblical exegesis for programmers.
2
 
12:48 PM
@waxeagle LOL, I like it. But we'll have to cross the blog bridge when we come to it :)
The river is wide. The river is deep.
 
@Caleb we can get a blog whenever :). Even in beta.
 
1:07 PM
I can't decide if this should be flagged as "not an answer".
 
It looks like a fairly valid answer to me. Granted, it seems completely screw-ball, but coming from the perspective of a fool, it seems valid.
However, the question itself... Yikes, this is a tough one.
@Caleb I think there are some great answers to the question. I don't think that is one of them. But I can't argue that it's "not an answer". I could see it being deleted as a troll post (if that's possible), but the "logic" seems sound (although strange).
 
@Richard That's just the trouble, there isn't a "this is foolishness" or "screw-ball" flag reason. I haven't flagged it for just the reasons you cite although my comments should indicate I don't think it's a legitimate defense or POV to give for that Q.
 
I personally think the question is a bad one. It might be suited for Philosophy.SE or something.
 
@dancek I actually agree with this, but I've been having trouble putting my finger on why.
 
@dancek: I think it's suitable enough for Christianity.SE. Every religion (including Christianity) will have some viewpoint on how its deity came into being (or if that's even something to consider). I think that asking for the Christian perspective is reasonable.
 
1:16 PM
@dancek I agree, but like @Richard I couldn't think of a valid reason for giving it the boot. It's bound to get asked so we might as well have and explanation around to at least close dups with.
 
I do think that the answer is oddball. I don't believe it's a troll post (the poster seems sincere), but I don't think it's suitable as it does not appear to answer the question from a Christian perspective.
 
@Caleb - quick question
@Caleb - why is your accept rate so low?
 
@AdamRobinson That's for the comment over there by the way :)
 
(The idea of culture creating God seems unquestionably non-Christian)
 
@Caleb @Adam - apologies for the gate crash... didn't see you were mid chat... :)
 
1:18 PM
@WikisAtArea51 No worries here :)
 
@WikisAtArea51 A couple reasons actually. A few of my questions simply don't have good answers. More than that tho, a bunch of them are controversial. I don't want to seem like I'm trying to bully a viewpoint into being canonically correct on the site, so there are a few that I will probably never "accept" unless somebody does a really good write up of multiple POVs, which per meta discussion I think is unreasonable. Leaving a few high-voted answers floating seems like the least troublesome solution.
 
@Adam - thanks
@Caleb, good answer, thanks.
 
@WikisAtArea51 I've accepted a few of the easier undisputed ones. I don't know long term how we're going to work this on the site but I foresee a bit of a problem with accepts.
 
@Caleb Might be a question for Meta?
@Caleb I haven't seen a problem yet myself, until I read your answer, above.
 
Yeah, the wide variety of Christian beliefs (and the fact that some will call them Christian and some will not) is going to make any but the most fundamental or simple questions difficult to have a "correct" answer in terms of the larger community.
 
1:22 PM
@WikisAtArea51 It already came up once. Mason brought it up I think. It don't think it's something we can work out right away, we have to see how it plays out a little first.
I think it's a bigger problem for the more outspoken people. I have strong opinions and am fairly outspoken about them. If I go accepting things that aren't somebody elses idea of an orthodox view it will make bigger waves and step on more toes than if some new user does.
 
Mind you, you're only giving YOUR accepted answer. The community's accepted answer is based on number of votes.
And the truth is something different again... :)
We need a disclaimer.
"Accepted answers are those of the questioner and are not representative of all strands of Christianity or all believers."
Or something.
 
@WikisAtArea51 True enough, but the general thought behind SE sites has been that the original questioner is not as important as the question itself :) The idea is building a knowledge base, rather than answering someone's question on an individual level.
 
I kind of subscribe to the idea that the truth will when out no matter what, I don't have to railroad people to the "right" answer. Having a few views out there to be read will give people an opportunity to discern for themselves.
 
@wikis It seems to me that stance will make flagging questions as duplicates very hard.
It might be better just to disable the 'accept rate' from showing up on Christianity.SE...
 
@WikisAtArea51 That's true, but that doen't mean everybody is going to understand the SE format, and like I said with the number of questions I have out there it might not go over too well.
 
1:26 PM
@DTest - why? You can post multiple answers to the same question. I guess I don't get your point.
 
@DTest That's been suggested. SE has "hinted" that they are actually working on changing the metric.
1
Q: Should we have an accept rate here?

Mason WheelerOver on Programmers, accept rate doesn't show up on your card when you ask a question. I wonder if we shouldn't adopt the same model here, since a lot of questions are going to bring very different answers from different viewpoints and make it hard to pick a single objective "right answer" the w...

 
@Caleb, oh yeah, I remember that one...
OK, I must dash, thanks for exchanging thoughts, I might drop back later.
Bye all.
 
Take care.
 
@DTest Why is that? The REQUESTED point of view is what will make things duplicates or not. If you ask "what do lutherans belive about X" that is not a duplicate of "what does the bible say about X" or "what is X". The tricky one is "what do christians think about X". Some of those answers will overlap elsewhere, but we don't flag duplicate answers only duplicate questions :)
 
@caleb I was looking at it from the viewpoint of 'I know this question was asked earlier, but I didn't like the accepted answer so I'm asking again to accept my own.'...which actually makes it an obvious duplicate now that I think about it.
 
1:34 PM
@DTest Yes, that makes it an obviously duplicate. Which is why on a lot of issues I think not accepting answers (so as not to tempt that response) might be a reasonable practice here.
 
(I think the two of you are saying the same thing ;)
 
@adam I think you're right.
@Caleb If they want to hack accept rates in the interim, it should be easy to add a css display:none on the element!
@waggers I'd +1 your answer on the question vs judgment question...if I had votes.
 
@Caleb it'd actually be good if diamond mods were able to un-accept answers, and did that whenever there's anything fishy going on
 
@dancek that seems really overlordy and probably not necessary with the community voting mechanic
 
I'm sure they probably can, but something would probably have to be more than just fishy to warrant that.
Keep in mind self-given answers don't float to the top even when accepted.
 
1:42 PM
@Caleb If we choose the guideline that controvesrial questions shouldn't have accepted answers, it'd be good to enforce that
 
Also the community has edit and close powers to take care of that kind of stuff.
I don't know if it can be a guideline. At this point it's just kind of something I've adopted for myself to make it easier on other folks.
@DTest Same here. Good question too.
0
Q: What's the goal of Catholic/Protestant ecumenism?

Peter TurnerIn a small town, the height of ecumenism is a joint Christmas choir concert. We certainly tolerate each other enough not to throw our respective clerics/elders out of our steeples. But we don't really come to any sort of understanding of each other. I've learned more about protestantism in 2 ...

I'm not sure how well it fits the QnA format but it's sure an interesting question!
 
@DTest Thanks, it's the thought that counts :)
 
2:00 PM
I'm out (or at least switching to mobile) for the rest of the day. Take care folks. Put this in your thinking caps and let's discuss closing some "in bad faith" questions at some point.
1
A: How can we get better expert-level questions? Or, StackExchange vs Yahoo! Answers

Mark TrappA few weeks into the beta, I've noticed most questions here are what I flippantly referred to in chat as "Sunday school fodder", but I don't think that really covers what I find so unappealing about the level of questions being asked. Which got me thinking about the other betas that didn't do so...

 
2:36 PM
gee, voting is sometimes so unfair! I've got +8 already with an answer that took a minute to write while there's a less voted better answer... I thought I'd get +1 or +2 with this: christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/2170/…
 
@dancek Yeah, it's very unfair--almost random at times. I think the shorter, simpler answers sometimes get voted higher because they're more easily read.
I suspect there's an entire psychology to the way votes are cast and which answer rises to the top.
2
 
Also the other answer was late to the party and we are all out of votes for the day.
There its time for it to rise.
 
3:11 PM
dancek: that's a common phenomenon on SE-style websites
 
@felideon indeed spending time on MSO will validate this theory :)
@Richard This would make an awesome psych thesis :)
 
@waxeagle Yeah, I'd be curious to see what the qualifiers would be for a high-voting question/answer. I suspect "easily digestable" would definitely be in the list.
 
@Richard indeed. My answers that have gotten solid votes here have been simple, scriptural answers, often with additional non-scripture outside links. (for example my Lev 14 answer had commentary from Matthew Henry in addition to a scripture verse).
 
3:41 PM
This seems to be not very constructive to me:
4
Q: What happens to people outside Earth on the second coming?

Jonathan. When Jesus returns, or the rapture,etc, and we having the events surrounding it, the bible says the whole earth will see it, day or night. Does the bible mention what happens to humans not on Earth, from space stations to the Moon and Mars (as current plans want to see humans on the Moon and on M...

 
@Richard its an odd little question from someone who has obviously been trying to trip up Christians, but I think it may have some validity...it at least allows us to express our opinion that God is god of the universe, not just earth.
 
It just seems to (1) go against the idea of SE as being a gathering of experts and (2) not be useful per the FAQ. I agree with the fact that it's nice to express this concept, but the question just seems... I don't know, "useless" comes to mind.
 
@Richard I think I'm with you...
 
Is this really an argument that people have against Christianity?
 
@Richard I haven't heard it before so I have no idea.
1
Q: Books on "Eastern" Christianities?

YujiI'm an East Asian non-Christian, so somehow I'm more interested, just from geographic closeness, in non-Catholic, non-Protestant, non-Orthodox type of Christian denominations. (i.e. those split from the "main branch" at the Councils of Ephesus and of Calchedon, the yellow and purple ones in the f...

before you vtc. does anyone have enough knowledge on the subject to know if the OP's assertion that books are rare to actually make a judgement here?
If they are sufficiently rare this question can and should stay as there is some precedent for shopping questions for obscure items (Jeff's HTPC remote question is coming to mind).
 
3:51 PM
I thought book recommendations are classic "off topic" examples.
 
@Richard they are. However obscurity sometimes wins out.
 
@Richard I agree with your points on the second coming question
 
@waxeagle Yeah, reading the question more thoroughly, this almost seems to be a "too localized" issue. The question is looking for something with "geographic closeness, in non-Catholic, non-Protestant, non-Orthodox type of Christian denominations". Yikes.
 
@Richard I think its valid outside of the localization, these are real churches that do consider themselves christian. See the wikipedia he linked.
List of Christian denominations (or Denominations self-identified as Christian) ordered by historical and doctrinal relationships. (See also: Christianity; Christian denominations; List of Christian denominations by number of members). Also, some groups included do not consider themselves a denomination (e.g., the Catholic Church considers itself the one true Church, and as pre-denominational). Regarding the use of the word "church," the Catholic Church does not consider any groups or denominations to be true "churches" unless they have maintained apostolic succession and observe the s...
he is interested in the yellow and purple lines on the picture in the linked article. I vtc'd the instant I saw book rec, but I'm wondering now.
ok. VTC. amazon has plenty of refs for it.
 
@waxeagle Good call.
I thought of amazon, but didn't get around to searching it.
 
4:00 PM
@Richard I realize he is likely outside the US, but he can at least get some titles from there.
 
 
1 hour later…
5:28 PM
@Richard are you still around?
 
Yup!
 
0
Q: What is the difference between man's soul and spirit?

jimreedIt is easy to recognize the body as the physical matter that makes up a person. The body is clearly distinct from the soul and spirit in several ways: The body is visible to others. (When I see you, I am seeing your body.) The body is recognizable by others. (I know who you are when I look a...

wondering how we can get this one on topic for you?
 
Yeah, I was just doing research on that.
 
I know its a philosphy question, but is it one that non-Christian philosophers actually care about?
 
@waxeagle Why is that one not on-topic?
 
5:30 PM
When I was first looking at it, it seemed purely a philosophical question. I didn't realize that the bible actually referred to both. I thought the bible only talked about one of the two.
 
@Richard this question has intrigued me for a long time. I'm interested to see the responses.
 
Yeah, my mistake. I didn't realize that was a biblical separation. I thought that humanity was a triune nature (body, mind, soul). I didn't know spirit was thrown in the mix (biblically)
 
Some notable theologians deny any difference between spirit and soul and others acknowledge a three part being. I'm not sure where I come down.
 
Yeah, it's going to be interesting.
 
@Richard yeah, is that an artifact of translation or an actual thing in the greek/hebrew?
 
5:33 PM
Ah, I see now.
 
@jimreed Is that edit alright? I don't want others to fall into the trap I fell into and misunderstand the question as a non-biblical one.
@jimreed Nevermind. Someone threw that in an answer. That should be sufficient. (I've rolled back my edit.)
 
@Richard also if tab complete doesn't work you can't ping him. Mods can :)
 
Nice. That's handy! I'm not too worried about it now. It's all clear enough for me and I think others won't fall into my own confusion. ;)
 
@Richard good deal. If you do need someone pinged in I'm willing to do it if I'm around...
 
Cool, thanks!
 
6:06 PM
dang, I'm as close as I've ever been to reversal on that Leviticus question...(read as: not close at all)
 
@waxeagle you should at least spell Leviticus right! (in the answer) :D
 
@DTest dang. will edit
@DTest fix'd
 
@waxeagle that was the sole reason for you not getting my vote on the answer...well it would have been if I didn't already upvote it
 
@DTest :P
2 more upvotes and I hit the rep cap :)
over half from that answer alone
still trying to figure out when God became omnibenevolent...
 
6:28 PM
hah, grats
 
upon research I see the omnibenevolence can mean whatever the heck you want it to mean :). It can mean God is perfectly good, or that God desires perfect good...hmmm. I will buy perfectly good, but it has nothing to do with fair. If God was fair we would all go to hell...
 
@waxeagle My suspicion is that this term was created just to fit with all the other omni-whatever stuff ;-)
 
hmm, are you omni-fabian, @fabian?
 
The hard thing about reversal is once people see a good answer they pitch in to edit it to be a God question and the votes reverse too.
 
@Fabian yeah, wikipedia traces it back to the 1600s, but it entered the common vernacular thanks to "The Case Against God"
 
6:32 PM
Good not God! Cell phone auto correct got the loose.
 
@Caleb lolz. Yes reversal is gold for a reason...
 
oh, I'm so close to Enlightened... it's just that @Caleb will never accept my answer when it's not the best one :P
 
rep cap!
 
@waxeagle gz!
 
@dancek thats always a grr...I think I have one our there like that right now
 
6:39 PM
funny, I started with SO and thought rep capping is impossible for a mortal... here it's very doable if you put in work
 
@dancek yeah, I started on smaller sites (gardening and RP) that don't have the volume to do it, I'd never done it until this site started, now I've done it twice
plus at least once on meta
 
@dancek It's still not THAT easy! :P
 
@ElendiaStarman I hit it today mostly from 1 solid answer and a couple of other ones that got a few votes each
 
@waxeagle That's just the thing...it's a rare question when I can actually answer it well. :P
@ElendiaStarman AND do better than others. :P
 
@ElendiaStarman I understand that. I try to only answer stuff where I know I can put in a solid answer.
man if 30 q/day keeps up this site is going to be a beast to moderate just for the volume, let alone the controversy...
 
6:45 PM
how does this post answer the question? i'm surprised it has seven votes. but maybe i'm just stupid today
7
A: What is the biblical justification for permitting female pastors?

CrystIf the Bible has said that women shouldn't be pastors, women should not, and are not to be pastors. One thing to keep in mind, is to remember that the Bible is God's WORD, and so, shouldn't be taken lightly. Now, having said that women shouldn't be pastors, what about Galatians 3:28 which obviou...

oh wait ne'er mind
it was posted before the question was made better
 
ok grr, can't remove my up-vote.
 
@ElendiaStarman yeah, of course it requires work and either good imagination (for good questions) or knowledge on some of the questions asked
 
@dancek or solid research skillz. Matthew Henry is a great place to start :)
 
@waxeagle is there a constructive edit you can make before down voting?
mhc ftw
also catholic encyclopaedia
 
I just noticed... there are only three unanswered questions at this point. And one of them is one vote shy of being closed.
 
6:56 PM
@djeikyb haven't check that out, is it much use to non-catholics?
@Richard nuked
 
@Richard ...I count one now. o.O
 
@waxeagle I've used it to give answers from a Catholic perspective or regarding what Catholics believe.
 
it's an excellent resource for non-roman catholics
 
@Richard good to know. btw I've been wondering what is your doctrinal perspective? Doesn't really matter, but for the morbidly curious...
 
it usually has a roman catholic slant, but it is upper-c Catholic in scope
 
6:59 PM
@djeikyb cool. Will check it out
 
@waxeagle I find I usually already have knowledge and then do some research on top of that
 
@waxeagle Hehe. :) I'm actually solidly Baptist. But I love arguing other sides of the coin (including Catholic, JW, FLDS, etc.)
 
especially considering that a good thousand or so years of christian history is the roman catholic church
 
@dancek thats usually my slant as well.
@djeikyb very true.
@Richard cool.
 
7:06 PM
@djeikyb Yeah, that was some good researching/knowledge.
 
i sympathise with sabellius. the mystery of the trinity confuses the hell out of me
 
Man Jonathan isn't pulling any punches today.
 
@djeikyb Lol. Being of a scientific mind, I tend to go with whichever theory makes most sense at the time... :P
@Caleb Lol, yeah.
 
@waxeagle grats on rep cap. I've done it once on SF on a fluke answer, imo. 5 more answer upvotes for today (shameless plug) :D
 
@DTest would that I could :). anyways, now its annoying, I'm losing hard earned rep :)
 
7:19 PM
hah
 
0
Q: What's the significance of hyssop in John 19:29?

El'endia StarmanThere is just one verse in the New Testament that refers to hyssop and is not referring to the Old Testament: Joen 19:29 (NLT) A jar of sour wine was sitting there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put it on a hyssop branch, and held it up to [Jesus'] lips. Why is the fact that a hyssop bra...

Expert-level question? :D
 
The book of Joen! Never read it..:P
 
@ElendiaStarman I think so. Do you know the answer already?
 
@waxeagle Basically, yes. I wouldn't even have known about this otherwise. :P
However, I'm sure that someone else knows more than I do... :P
 
@ElendiaStarman I'm interested in the answers you get there, I want to see if what I'm thinking of is posted...
 
7:27 PM
@DTest ...[sigh] Hoowwwww did THAT happeeennnnnn?!? :P
 
I think I have enough flags out to get deputy :). Hopefully at least one is valid
 
hah
badge hunter
 
@DTest :). I don't think I've flagged anything that didn't deserve it...or wasn't at least borderline
 
@waxeagle do you lose flag weight if the flag is marked 'unhelpful' ?
 
@DTest yes
 
7:31 PM
@Fabian But nothing happens if it's declined, right?
 
@ElendiaStarman There is just helpful and declined, and declined will reduce your flag weight by -10
declined results in the "unhelpful" you see in the flagging history
 
@Fabian It actually says "declined" to me, not "unhelpful".
 
@ElendiaStarman okay, I don't have a declined flag to check that, I assumed it would be the opposite of helpful. The moderator view says "declined", so it makes sense somehow.
 
Huh...Jeremiah 29:11...
NLT: For I know the plans I have for you,” says the Lord. “They are plans for good and not for disaster, to give you a future and a hope.
NIV: For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.
KJV: For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.
I've never thought that "expected end" could be synonymous with "hope and a future"...
 
@ElendiaStarman I'll be honest, KJV can be sketch sometimes...possibly because we don't talk like that...
 
7:42 PM
well everyone expects to live happily ever after
i consider KJV-english its own language
 
@waxeagle Well, yes, but the other parts of the verse make sense. It's just the idea of an end doesn't mesh with the idea of no end as in the other two versions.
@djeikyb Good point.
 
@ElendiaStarman my tongue is planted against my cheek
 
@djeikyb LOL. :P
14
Christianitychristianity.stackexchange.com

Beta Q&A site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more.

Currently in public beta.

O.O 100% answered! :P
 
Yeah, it kind of makes it hard to find things to answer...
 
i'm sure there are plenty of bad answers
 
7:49 PM
@Richard Heheh...yeah...
 
@djeikyb The trick is finding them.
 
By the way peoples, do you guys think I could post a question asking how it makes sense for the KJV to translate that passage that way?
 
Our visits per day is low, but we're still relatively young.
I think that's a great question! It dives into the Greek and such. Fun stuff!
Oh wait, Jeremiah... That would be the Hebrew.
 
Saaame difference...... ;P
 
@ElendiaStarman because the kjv is the divine word of god, superior to even the original languages
@Richard septuagint?
 
7:52 PM
@djeikyb
 
@ElendiaStarman I'd say its a good question.
 
@Richard and @waxeagle: Sweet! Writing it up now...
 
@djeikyb Well, that's probably what I'd use, but that's what I have access to.
 
@Richard this will likely shoot up dramatically as google starts finding us with more regularity
(SE goal is 90ish% of traffic from Search Engines)
 
Yeah, I'm not too worried about it. It seems public betas last a while.
@waxeagle That's fascinating!
 
7:55 PM
@Richard hitting three-fifths of the goals in a couple weeks isn't too bad
 
It actually makes sense to me but I've read old English literature that uses that usage of end before. Did you check NKJV?
 
That's for sure!
 
@Caleb NKJV is in line with other modern translations, actually. Interesting...
 
@Richard at least 90 days, most of them go more than 90...
 
@waxeagle That's good to know. Database Administrators went for about a year, I believe.
 
02:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (13 days earlier)      last day (4617 days later) »