« first day (34 days earlier)      last day (3842 days later) » 

9:55 AM
@Ray please can you add you "Biblical Hermeneutics and Exegesis" suggestion here?
Q: What should our URL be?

Jack DouglasThis question has been asked before, but now that the site has had some time to find it's feet and the community is taking shape, we need to survey what the current thinking is. Below is a list of all the previous suggestions I could find - please add any others I've missed and discuss in the co...

4 hours later…
1:35 PM
@JonEricson Hope you are ok with my edits and adding a new version of the original title question to get an up to date picture of opinion
1 hour later…
3:02 PM
@Ray, @Richard are you around?
One of my meta questions about the title/url was closed by Robert Cartaino
I've reopened and left a comment asking him to join us in chat before closing again
wanted to check I'd done the right thing?
Yeah, I'll go ahead and close the old thread to help people know that this has been redirected.
Also, it shows a more united front (coming from two mods).
good idea - thanks!
I've pinged him in the Teacher's Lounge but I don't think he is around right now...
I'll let you know if he gets back to me.
3:25 PM
It sounds like Robert is saying that we should allow the original question to stand
In other words, the four or so of us who have discussed this in chat may have some ideas that we want to push through, but that that shouldn't be cause for us to flex our mod muscles... if the other answers got more votes, that suffices for a consensus
If I'm following where he's coming from
Also, I saw Robert joined TL
3:40 PM
Our site has been very quiet lately.
@Ami Yeah, but not too bad. There's always a flurry right at the beginning, as a site matures, things slow down as it builds critical mass.
Compare this to other sites and we're doing alright (I don't think we're quite at the 50th percentile, though).
We compare well with Philosophy.SE, for example.
4:17 PM
15 messages moved from Moderators for BiblicalHermeneutics.SE
4:29 PM
oops probably shouldn't link to TL from here. Robert says: "we're good", which means though he disagrees whith (what he thinks are) our reasons for re-asking, he will not oppose them
One thing that's probably missing is that I think there was a misunderstanding early on regarding what hermeneutics is... it seemed that people understood hermeneutics to be essentially what I would refer to as exegesis, and that misunderstanding influenced the name for the site
I think that the community has come to understand the distinction better by now
This is true. We were still exploring these concepts at the time the original question was asked. (October 4th on both of those.)
Also, there are a few topics that seem to be on-topic to this site that we didn't quite realize, such as textual criticism questions (October 6th).
or historic questions (October 11th), which admittedly is a subset of Hermeneutics or Exegesis (historical hermeneutics/exegesis).
All these discussion bring up another question in my mind:
Q: Is translation a subset of exegesis?

RichardThis site is in an odd position. Questions about the site are also questions that are valid for the site. This is another such question. It seems that there has been discussion on chat multiple times regarding translation and exegesis. At one point, translation was understood (by me) to be pa...

We've determined both of these to be on topic, so it doesn't quite impact the discussion of site scope, but it's related.
5:05 PM
As well, the original definition on Area51 explicitly referenced exegesis.
Biblical Hermeneuticshermeneutics.stackexchange.com

Beta Q&A site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts.

Currently in public beta.

Oh man... We really need to increase our number of questions.
and our user base.
@JackDouglas Definitely. I probably poisoned the well by suggesting a bias for short, clever and comprehensive.
@Richard I find the sites similar in many ways.
@Richard This is true. My emails to bloggers have born no fruit and I wonder if the name is partially to blame. (But more likely, we need to find more people to invite.)
5:26 PM
@JonEricson I think if we can generate good content, we'll attract the people naturally. It's just really hard to think of new questions.
@Richard "If we build it, they will come..."
I've mentioned it personally to several different people. One of them committed on Area51 several months ago, but has never joined now that it's live as far as I can tell. More recently I've gotten verbal commitments to check it out. One person joined and answered one question, 3 weeks ago...
Kinda disappointing.
It's hard to get into the model sometimes.
Our church had a visiting speaker from Southern Seminary last weekend, but I never had a chance to talk to him.
@Richard Yeah, I know it took me a while to get into SO when it launched, and took several extended breaks from it since then too.
I never could get into SO. It's too chaotic for me.
And too large.
5:37 PM
@Richard By the way, that's one of the reasons I've proposed weekly challenges. Sometimes it's easier to come up with questions if you have some preexisting angle to tackle. I don't know if it's working though...
@JonEricson I really do like the idea. I seem to come up with questions better simply by reading the Bible, though. Of course, that's pretty evident in my questions.
@Richard Yep. My best questions (and the ones I'm most excited about the answers I received) were from reading a text, thinking "What the...", and asking with little to no research.
I know I've definitely been stretched and strengthened in a number of areas already, just through research and reading other questions/answers.
6:10 PM
Hey @Soldarnal, are you around?
Huh. He was a bit ago...
@JonEricson (regarding your comment here), no.
Usage of the word batach is limited to things that might actively protect me in a physical way.
@Ami Ok. Then I don't understand at all.
What do I need to fix?
@Ami Could I boteach a bungee cord?
6:16 PM
<strike>yes</strike> maybe
(that's sorta border line)
normally you're boteach in your fortress
or your army
@Ami Ok. I'm trying to think of if we have a term in English that catches that nuance...
(In biblical times, you probably would have gotten a weird look for saying that you were boteach in a bungee cord.)
@Ami I guess what I imagined when I read your answer was that it was a word that meant, "I'd stake my life on this." So in the case of jumping off of a bridge, I stake my life that this bungee cord will break my fall.
Does "rely" get at the meaning at all? "I rely on God | my fortress | my army."
@JonEricson, when batach is not used in reference to God, the meaning is clear: "physical protection from attack." Once the word batach is used in reference to God, the meaning becomes more ambiguous. "I rely on" works as does "I am afforded security in...." Of course the word "security" is ambiguous here and can mean various things...
I'm not sure how to change your answer. But incorporating some of your comments here would help me.
Could batach work as "I am afforded security in my wealth"? (My guess is no.)
6:30 PM
That's a difficult one...I'm pretty sure you don't find that in the OT, but it might work if you mean to say that your wealth can protect you from a physical attack.
In summary: when batach is not used in relation to God it means physical protection from a physical attack. When batach is used in relation to God it has a broader meaning which includes: "to rely on God" and "to find security in faith."
Does that make sense?
@Ami Got it. I think I understand the distinction now. (And it's more complicated than my initial mental model.)
I have to run for now, but I made a little addition to my answer which will hopefully be helpful.
@Ray I am now
6:40 PM
I was looking at your question about irony in 1 Cor
Wondering about the inclusion of the verse in the question
As in, is it the right verse?
oh, i meant actually quoting the verse...
Actually I was not all that concerned about this specific instance, but I was wondering about how we should do that in general
Yeah, I've been simply linking to verses lately rather than quoting them in the question
@Soldarnal To butt in, I prefer quoting in the post if possible. It helps me see what the question is about a lot quicker. (And I sometimes skip questions I don't get right away.)
sorry, had someone at my desk
6:49 PM
I've thought about just block-quoting the verse/section at the top of the question, but seems like a strange way to start a question for some reason
I haven't exactly seen a standard about it... I just find it useful because I'm lazy
I think there's probably wisdom called for... If you're asking about a whole chapter, it's probably wise to just link (I actually find extended quotations annoying), but I don't see why a single verse couldn't be quoted
I amended that particular question - see if either of you likes that better.
Q: Is 1 Corinthians 11:19 intended as irony?

SoldarnalMy question is about the following text: But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it ...

I think that's a good edit... actually it's helpful also that you included some of the context
I'm interesting in your thoughts in the general case.. should we expect references to be quoted?
One question I would have is how much are we allowed to quote?
Is there a point where too much of, say, the ESV would be contained on the site
Yeah, I guess that's a judgment call; lengthy quotations can be cumbersome
Oh, I didn't even think of copyright issues
I know ESV has a bunch of rules about what percentages of texts you're allowed to have on your site, etc
6:58 PM
Right, and doubtless we wouldn't exceed those on any particular question
But I've been wondering how it would apply to the site as a whole
Yeah, that's a great question... I think I should follow up with SE staff on that one, since ultimately it would be SE on the hook
Aside from that, I agree that adding a quotation like that where appropriate helps make a question easier to engage
If it's a whole chapter or lengthy section, though, it's probably better to link off site
Thanks, I appreciate your input

« first day (34 days earlier)      last day (3842 days later) »