@caseyr547 On a note about frustrations for newcommers, see my really embarrassing and stupidly long first meta post. Frustrations for new users is rather common, but if you try you can embrace the current site norms and still enjoy yourself.
@RyanFrame OMG. That is awesome. And it can say Christianity.SE at the bottom.
@TRiG I think there is a difference between talking about sex and talking about the finer points of the kind of sex you prefer.
@fredsbend i could in many situations in life be comfortable abounding and abasing and the like but the problem isn't my happiness but others happiness specifically those who are my enemy, those who are oppressed and the poor. The se framework already is somewhat oppressive to those who are poor in some regards. Christianity se rules are only more oppressive. I'm not haten oppression happens where groups of authority figures limit basic freedoms with good or ill intentions.
of course I think any nation which limits free speech rather than regulating it is opressive
@caseyr547 strict and restrictive maybe, but suggesting the model is oppressive is odd at best. I'd love to hear you expand on this because I don't really understand how you get from "restrictive content model" to oppression.
@caseyr547 Stack Exchange is not a nation. We regulate content because the model that we operate under requires that. The goal of Stack Exchange is high Signal to noise ratio sites about very narrow topics.
@Anonymous yes, the green means the message is still pending
@Anonymous ever raging site policy debates. Seems like someone comes along about once every couple months that wants basically the same thing. For us to abandon the quality standards that have made us the site that we are.
If it is caseyr547, then I think caseyr547 should really know the basic principles of Internet communication. Flagging is typically used when conversations are very inappropriate for the subject, inappropriate for polite company, and the like.
@Anonymous essentially they are questions that try to seek out what is "true" or what "chrisitans believe" about a certain topic. What we aim for here is to narrow questions to asking what specific groups or doctrinal frameworks believe. The basic premise being that no one agrees on anything.
for the purpose of this site, there is no truth. There is only what specific groups believe to be true.
@Anonymous sort of, but in a sense it's the opposite. We want biased answers, the bias is set in the question. IE if a question is about a piece of baptist doctrine we want the baptist perspective on it. we don't want the calvinist's thoughts on it, that's irrelevant because we're communicating how the baptists view their doctrine. I'ts not NPOV it's actually OPPOV (original post point of view)
> None of us will argue that it's perfect and all of us probably wish this site catered more thoroughly to truth rather than to the blasphemous hodge podge we've put together, but so far it's working, and we've been successful by the metrics SE uses so I call that a win.
@caseyr547 OK let's be straight here. The worst downvoted posts on this site have received less than 20 net downvotes. That's 8 question upvotes in harm or 4 answer upvotes (if we assume that harm is determined by reputation).
So - most [closed] questions are posted by new users.
But experienced users continue to "pile on" and -1 vote them, even after they are closed!
What gives?
As far as I can see this:
This discourages new users because:
Does nothing to improve the question. (That's what comments are for.)
It s...
I wrote an answer arguing that yes there are benefits, though strong downvoting should only be applied in rare cases: meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/a/2979/1084
My step-son keeps comparing me to his biological father, and I don't know why.
I've been in a relationship with this woman for almost 3 years. She has been married previously and has a 6 year old son. I have a great relationship with her son. He loves me so much and trusts me a lot; there hasn...
@caseyr547 no, that post was motivated by the relative success of parenting and prog.se
the idea being that you could have good subjective questions on the SE engine. Before those sites this engine was largely relegated to very objective questions about programming and those sites were of questionable potential.
Overall they've done well. And most sites now have a mix of objective and subjective questions to varying degrees. (RPG is a site with a pretty wild mix)
As NPOV as possible; we try to take steps to avoid 'mostly opinion' content. I try to emphasize the research process, the importance of specifying hypotheses and so on.
Slowly waking up! --The community manages itself to a much larger degree, and there are [starting to be] a good number of high-rep users to help us out.
1Co 13:4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
Orthopraxy is the application of orthodox beliefs rituals, customs, approved practices are all orthopraxic. 1Co 13:4-7 are the orthodox verse which describe the orthopraxic com...
Why do so many Bible literalist Protestants disregard this verse? is one question
then in general why do protestant evangelical Bible literalist Christian's allow things like venue and peer pressure to control orthopraxic practices as described by the Bible?
3 things to help: 1. use a question for a title 2. take a paragraph at the start and end to summarize your question so it's clear what your asking 3. use some formatting to set off important things in your text (bold or italics)
you've got a ton of text there but it's hard to find a quesiton
(one of the sneaky goals of SE is to make you a better writer. It works too)
(Jeff's confession: "I have a confession to make: in a way, I founded Stack Overflow to trick my fellow programmers.")
it doesn't have any close votes right now...But I'll be honest I'm trying to read it and it might be the fact that it's 2am, but I'm having trouble getting through it.
ultimately it's still really unclear what you're getting at.
even with the slight amount of formatting
I see the questions now, but I'm not sure the context lends itself to answers. Especially not constructive ones. Almost anything someone could post on that would be highly speculative unless they could manage to point to a study that actually looked at the reasons why.
@caseyr547 Number one issue: IT"S TOO FREAKING LONG. I can see what you are asking, but I think you could have accomplished that in one paragraph instead of five. I commented to help you see what you should do. But the number one thing for any question: Be as concise as possible.
I see @Caleb just closed it but I am having trouble understanding his comment. Never mind that anyway, if you take my suggestions I'm sure he will gladly reopen it.
A note on Caleb:
He is tough, but fair. It may not seem like he is fair when he comes down on you, but trust me, he is. We bumped heads a few times when I first started out on the site and I didn't like it. Now, however, I appreciate that he spent the time on me and made me a better user of this site.
Well, he just left a bunch of comments. See, he rarely acts without explanation and suggestion for improvement.
@caseyr547: I think you have a decent question now, though it is too long; you seem to be assuming a certain answer. For example, "Then in general why do ... Bible literalist Christian's [sic] allow things like venue and peer pressure to control orthopraxic practices as described by the Bible?"
combines the real question "why do .... Christians not follow clearly prescribed orthopraxic practices in the Bible?" with the answer "They allow things like venue and peer pressure to..."; I think a good case can be made for the question, but not the answer. When they're combined, the question becomes unanswerable.
@waxeagle What about Reformed Baptists? A Reformed Baptist would probably include information about Calvinism within Baptist doctrine, because that is what it is.
Maybe it is advisable that we write in an encyclopedic tone of voice to distance ourselves from the responses. In that way, a person who is Baptist writes an accurate description of a Roman Catholic reply to a question concerning Roman Catholicism.
Accurate in a sense that it is well cited by reliable sources.
I think there is one problem with avoiding "truth" questions. If a non-Christian poses a question, then it is easy for the non-Christian to see Christianity as one monolithic group or may ignore subtle distinctions between the denominations and between liberal and conservative Christians.
Also, it is important to note that within Catholicism, there are Old Catholic, Traditionalist Catholic, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox Catholic.
There is also "Evangelical Catholic".
@waxeagle I suppose that would be helpful on behalf of the questioner. Once a person knows that Christianity is diverse and divided on almost every single issue, that person may find that some denominations may sound more appealing than others. Maybe a person likes the standard Roman Catholic method of evangelism (building schools, seminaries, hospitals) over the typical Evangelical Protestant method of evangelism (door-to-door preaching).
@Anonymous Yes. and that's where the basic research requirement comes in. Find a group that interests you and ask questions about that.
I often compare it to selecting a language before you ask a question on Stackoverflow or indicating what system you're playing for an RPG question.
(and I will say that RPG has a whole class of questions where the system doesn't matter, but what happens there is that specific concepts or group dynamics are dealt with. This is akin to us dealing with specific doctrinal concepts.
However, I think the Wikipedia Reference Desks can help in a way that the members can offer almost all the options on a certain topic (i.e. the kingdom of God), which some Christians perceive as "end-times". Though, the kingdom of God may also refer to the messianic age, which is the present time.
The kingdom of God may also be a heavenly place somewhere God lives.
Once a person had graduated with the basic knowledge of Christianity, he/she may move forward and look into the doctrinal details of each denomination.
@Anonymous: confusing someone with a dozen interpretations of "the Kingdom of God" isn't introducing someone to the basics of Christianity. "What is the Kingdom of God?" really isn't a useful question. "According to Roman Catholicism, what is the Kingdom of God?" and "According to Calvin, what is the Kingdom of God?" could be.
Without a reference point for the interpretation, the answer doesn't really answer anything -- it's just the opinion of somebody on the Internet, and why should I trust that?
The concept of "born again" is based on a translation of the Bible, and some bibles may translate the original verses or annotate it as "from above". Roman Catholic and mainline Protestants may have similar views of being born again, but evangelical Protestants may have differing views, thinking that it refers to the born-again experience.
I'm asking questions where I don't necessarily want to hear what their pastor said, or what some website says, I don't even necessarily want to know what an official plenary session of any denomination said in the past 100 years.
I'm looking for what the popes have said. I'm looking for what was...
People generally get baptized, because they perceive it is meaningful to them, and the Bible does seem to imply it, even though the means of baptism is most disagreed upon and not very explicitly mentioned in the Bible.
@iKlsR Most Christian traditions teach that baptism is a sign, something we do as part of obedience and even a seal of something but that God's work of saving a person is independent from the action of baptism. There are a few traditions that teach otherwise, notably some periods of Catholic history.
@Anonymous Ok even that is dubious but it's understandable. The problem isn't so much that specific means aren't mentioned so much as there are more than one specific means mentioned explicitly and it's not clearly agreed upon what the differences are about.
Anglicans believe that baptism is supposed to symbolize the resurrection of Christ and the crossing of the (Jordan) river.
I wonder what you would call a person who is an unbaptized agnostic or atheist but is inspired by Jesus' teachings and completely unaffiliated with any church.
For Christian atheists, I think it's easy to focus on the humanity of Jesus than on the supposed divinity of Jesus. I'm sure that we all know that Jesus was a human being that existed.
@iKlsR I can only speak from small observations, but en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheist has a defitinition. Utlimately though this guy wanted to claim he was forging his own path.
I don't go to church anymore, haven't been for the last ~6 years or so. I think its ridiculous, the people sometimes get up and start running up and down making random noises saying they are 'feeling' the Holy Ghost etc..
@waxeagle It seems you are vaguely referring to me. ;)
@iKlsR They probably stereotyped and associated Jamaica as an impoverished country.
Christianity is a highly evangelistic religion; it spreads everywhere. I doubt there is a single person in the world who does not know what Christianity is. :P
@Caleb Well, if the Internet is unavailable, that person may read a book or contact a librarian, preferably a subject librarian who is well versed in the field of Christianity or Biblical studies.
@iKlsR I wonder how "homophobic" is very, very homophobic. Maybe it is of the Westboro Baptist Church variety.
The Westboro Baptist Church is extremely anti-gay, and they are loud about it.
Some people are anti-gay, but they tend to be more soft-spoken.
@Anonymous I live in a country of 70+ million and there isn't a public library in the country that carries a Bible much less has a subject librarian that knows beans about Christianity. A few major cities are likely to have a couple bookstores where you could get a copy, but you could spend a day hunting around until you found it.
Online (until the last 5 years) wasn't much better unless you spoke a foreign language. It's still pretty sketchy but there is at least the possibility of finding info there now.
@waxeagle But homosexuality then was different than homosexuality now. At that time, homosexuality was largely interpreted as behavior, not as a sexual orientation.
As a sexual orientation, the only solution seems to be to accept homosexuals for who they are.
@Anonymous yes, I'm a Calvinist through and through. Though most Christians acknowledge the sinfulness of all humans and the need for a savior, it's just whether we came that way or did it ourselves.
most of us acknowledge that our current state of existence is "need savior asap"
@waxeagle That seems to be contrary to the humanist message, which is to say that humans can help themselves without God or a savior or any sort of divine assistance.
@waxeagle Well, maybe a gay Christian could repent of his/her homosexuality and try to ask God for assistance. Maybe only limit his/her homosexual behavior with his/her gay partner in marriage.
That way, the gay Christian is not committing adultery.
@Anonymous opinions vary, but depending on the Christian group they will be told their marriage never existed (I'm not sure I espouse this. I'm decidedly un decided when it comes to how to actually deal with homosexuality in the church)
@Anonymous This is a rather complicated question to me. I can accept that people are born predisposed to homosexuality (others cannot). I don't know if it's actually true, but our current science indicates it, I can accept it. It's also very much not healthy to hide one's inclinations and that's not actually in the spirit of the gospel. So Neither.
The problem lies in whether or not one considered homosexual behavior inherently sinful. A large swath of Christianity would hold that any sex acts done outside of the confines of a marriage are sinful. So that helps until we start to sanction homosexual marriage
Perhaps, another solution would be treating gay Christians like everybody else and making them repent like everybody else. The sin does not have to be so tied-up to the homosexual behavior.
@waxeagle And that can lead anti-gay advocates to the quote "It's not Adam and Steve; it's Adam and Eve!" Though, there will require a literal interpretation of creation.
@caseyr547 Good deal. you're also welcome to contact SEI privately through teh contact us link at the bottom of any page. There is an other link there that the community team responds to.
@waxeagle Do you think that the emphasis of everyone being sinners is to make people think that they cannot think they are naturally better than other people?
@Anonymous No, though it is a good reminder to not be prideful. I think that there are elements of pride that can be quite virtuous. Pursuing excellence tends to be a characteristic of pride and done correctly is very beneficial
Right! It would seem to me it's a virtue insofar as pride is part of becoming-original; becoming-yourself; remaking and discovering yourself, etc. It's just as basic to the human experience as anger, and perhaps even more problematic (if permitted to become vanity...)
@Anonymous no likely it's a combination of things. SEI may give them some access to information, I'm not sure. But there are a lot of things you can just find out about people by watching routing traffic
@Anonymous how I understand it (And my understanding is very rudimentary at this point) is that this reports back some basic things about you to a central server (maybe and IP, probably what browser you're using). They have this on several thousand websites. Then they can create aggregate statistical models with it. I honestly don't know what information they collect, I'm speculating
and IP location is both very imprecise (city and country at best) and also not always reliable
I find it paradoxical that in the United States women are more religious than men, but men appear to be more active on websites. Maybe I am missing one factor: time. Men may have more free time than women.
@Anonymous a huge chunk of stack exchange users were Stackoverflow users first and have branched out. SO is for programmers which is a male dominated profession
@waxeagle In addition, the popular culture image of a "nerd" looks like an awkward white, male, bespectacled person who is fascinated with computers, science, and "geeky" stuff.
Have you watched the Monday parody of the Rebecca Black's Friday song? At first glance, I thought it was about a group of studious students who loved studying and made a song about it. But really, it's a bunch of nerds, as mentioned in the credits.
By that standard, it's easy to classify or stereotype Asians as "nerdy". Asian may value education very highly, but they may or may not be nerds/socially awkward. Rather, Asian cultures are known to be collectivist.
@caseyr547 Please let people with some experience and actual success at asking questions be the ones to help guide people through the process. Right now we're still trying to help you navigate the system and learn what's required, and we're not there yet. Until then please stop trying to be the one to tell newbies how things are done. If you have a problem with the way things are run and want to vent about how it's not your policy, just take it straight to meta. Otherwise let the people that have figured out how to work inside the system constructively be the ones to act as guides.
@caseyr547 Consider it a word to the wise. A piece of advice from somebody who's seen this road.
If you have concerns about it being a rule or not, the venue for discussing that is meta. You can raise a specific concern with any moderator actions you see there so the community can act as jury and make sure it's in line with what they want to see, but I don't want to see everything turn into a rule. I'd rather see you learn what you can from advice. I'm happy to chat about it here. Or more formally on meta.
@caseyr547 No, no-one is going to apologize for "random" closures because they are not random. We even go so far as to comment on every single one explaining exactly what the issues are. If you disagree with the issues the venue to discuss that is meta, NOT comments on new users posts.
@caseyr547 Hence why we EXPLAIN closures. Not apologize for them. If you don't like the close system, SE is not the place for you. If you think the system could be used to better effect, meta is the place to suggest your idea. In the mean time you cannot just hijack it in comments.
@caseyr547 Your doing the same thing I explained in this comment.
@caseyr547 The issue here is not you being hostile as a person. Nobody is accusing you of that. What we're concerned with here is the way the question reads. The "questions" here are rhetorical in the sense that they are Loaded Questions. You might know this logic falacy from the wife-beater example. Asked a yes/no question, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?", either way you answer you have 'admitted' beating your wife. — Caleb5 hours ago
No i'm not saying you can't say kind things. Please do. But don't include advice to newbies on how to ask questions on your list of things to say (kindly or otherwise) until you have gotten the hang on asking constructive questions yourself
@caseyr547 That statement was written DIRECTLY to you by me based on your posts. I am trying to help you see a logical fallacy you're making that is part of the reason you're getting so much flack for your posts. Does that matter to you?
i just want to know if any word of faith people agree with me and if so how common is it. i am open to correction from another word of faith person.
please only respond if you have experience with word of faith view of the scripture. this very specifically means that the views of the "early chur...
@JonEricson But that requires being knowledgeable on Christianity and knowing all the fine details. Reading Christianity For Dummies would be useless in this case.
So - most [closed] questions are posted by new users.
But experienced users continue to "pile on" and -1 vote them, even after they are closed!
What gives?
As far as I can see this:
This discourages new users because:
Does nothing to improve the question. (That's what comments are for.)
It s...
My step-son keeps comparing me to his biological father, and I don't know why.
I've been in a relationship with this woman for almost 3 years. She has been married previously and has a 6 year old son. I have a great relationship with her son. He loves me so much and trusts me a lot; there hasn...
The Upper Room
The Upper Room