@JackDouglas, @digitaloday, I never said "heresy implies orthodoxy..." I only once quoted @JonEricson, who posted that here. I never voiced an opinion about putting doctrine in answers. However, I think I've been misquoted in @digitaloday's answer.
@digitaloday the line has to be drawn somewhere else than "Some would likely be very offended" - more like "this is generally (or even nearly-universally) considered an offensive term"
otherwise there are many other words we would have to ban :-)
@digitaloday the meta question asked by Jon is binding on mods - if it is upvoted we will delete any question or answer that includes the word 'heresy' in any non-descriptive manner...
Isaiah 3:12a states (ESV):
My people — infants are their oppressors, and women rule over them.
This is showing one of the signs of affliction upon Israel for their disobedience. We see in Judges where at this time the men were quite passive. In Judges 4:8 we see after Deborah asked Barak ...
If you previously downvoted please consider whether you still feel that is right, and of course vote whichever way you think is best.
I've also taken the liberty of removing all th comments from both answers - I feel we need a fresh start :-)
A recent comment on another question demonstrated a common perspective, namely that textual criticism is always a bad thing when interpreting scripture. Several questions have already been asked on this site dealing with redaction criticism, historical criticism, and the difference between higher...
@JackDouglas I'm still not clear about how Lance's edit resolves the problem.
Sure it eliminates the ambiguity of the word "feminism", but the other term, "heresy", is just as ambiguous -- and potentially explosive.
It's ambiguous because we all come from different perspectives, and have a different understanding of what constitutes "right belief".
And the reason the word "heresy" has no place here is because this is a beta site and our goal should be to bring in new members, and the larger question we need to answer is, "Who should feel welcome here?"
The answer to that question is not, "everybody". That would only be possible in a fantasy world.
When new people arrive at BH by googling for expert opinion about Deborah's leadership, which sort of people do we want to keep around? Those who have an axe to grind about male/female roles, or those who want to see analysis of the text from various points of view?
How we answer that question is going to determine how this site grows. I don't want to attract users who, encouraged by the use of the word "heresy" here, come in and run down other users in an attempt to enforce some idea of site orthodoxy.
It's better to eliminate that phrase today from an otherwise good answer, and promote a "site orthodoxy" of sticking to the text.
@JackDouglas I thought I had. It's ambiguous because we all come from different perspectives and have different understandings of what constitutes "right belief" -- and of which issues demand agreement and which ones allow for diversity of views.
@JackDouglas It's potentially explosive because it can be--historically, it has been--used to suppress dissent, even to the point of killing those who disagree. So it's not just a word used to make a distinction between two points of view; it's a term with a lot of baggage.
@Bruce but is it not generally understood that when someone uses the word they mean 'relative to their own framework or beliefs" unless they specify otherwise?
You make a good point about the baggage - sort of like the term 'slave' in that sense I guess. I'm sure some will find the very ord offensive but I think something has to be near-universally offensive for us to take the draconian step of banning it from the site. Do you think 'heresy' is near-universally offensive? Within reason we want to tolerate the POV (and style/culture/language) differences of others to maintain a healthy site IMO.
Btw sorry about the delayed reply - its getting late here and I should probably sign off for the night - but I'd be glad to continue this conversation another time :-)
Isaiah 3:12a states (ESV):
My people — infants are their oppressors, and women rule over them.
This is showing one of the signs of affliction upon Israel for their disobedience. We see in Judges where at this time the men were quite passive. In Judges 4:8 we see after Deborah asked Barak ...
The Library
The Library