« first day (636 days earlier)      last day (3075 days later) » 

7:45 AM
@MonicaCellio I would be really interested in an answer to Mike's recent questions about Daniel 2 from a Jewish perspective, if you have time. If not, any chance I could convince you to comment on it in chat?
 
 
7 hours later…
2:42 PM
@Jas3.1 I will take a look. Thanks for letting me know there's a specific interest. (I have a theory about ten toes but want to see if I can support it with sources first.)
 
 
2 hours later…
4:25 PM
Can I get a sanity check on something? Does this comment address the question it's connected to at all:
@rhetorician There exists some Christian sects which vehemently oppose Paul and his teachings as deception and consider him to be heretic,The mentioned verse is rejected by themAli 23 hours ago
Among other things, it runs very close the edge of our low-tolerance for the word heresy policy:
0
Q: Is the word "heresy" an offensive word?

Jon EricsonIt seems from this question, its comments, answers, and chat, that the word "heresy" and any of its derivatives can be seen as offensive. We are a non-doctrinal site and so there's no such thing as orthodoxy here. Therefore, anyone addressing some point of view as a "heresy" is not making a val...

 
4:41 PM
@JonEricson who the heck is "voice of Jesus", whcih declares itself as "not a Christian site"? (I think I can guess, but I found no "who we are" page on their site.)
@JonEricson it doesn't sound like it addresses the question (or previous comments) to me. For what that's worth, coming from someone with less knowledge than y'all about those particular books.
 
@MonicaCellio @JonEricson It's not obvious from the link in the comment that the verse is specifically rejected by those who reject Paul's theology as a heretical Christianity.
In which case it seems more like advertising for a particular sect attached to any question which happens to be about Paul
Considering the user is temporarily suspended from three other sites, it's hard to assume good faith
 
4:57 PM
Hey @JonEricson, did you see the status change on this?
49
Q: Do not expire single-use tags that have a tag wiki

GillesSingle-use tags automatically expire after a few months. This is arguably the right thing when the tag is a misspelling (though I'd prefer some way of reviewing the process — but this post is not about that). However, if the tag was clearly deliberate, the default should be not to delete it. I pr...

@Soldarnal and that fits a pattern he's used before on other sites -- find any hook, or sometimes none at all, to hang a link he wants to push.
 
5:24 PM
@Soldarnal and @MonicaCellio:
@Ali: I don't see how that link has anything to do with the question at hand. In essence it's spam in every way except that it's not commercial in nature. I'm also deeply concerned with the use of the word heretic. I'm deleting this comment and asking you to not use that word (or any derivatives) and not to link to irrelevant material on this site. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. — Jon Ericson 55 secs ago
@MonicaCellio I did! Yay! (I hope.)
 
 
4 hours later…
9:07 PM
@dan Have you by chance seen this post?
10
Q: What does "the saints are not keepers of the law, but legislators" mean?

James TIn a recent encyclical marking the 1700th anniversary of the Edict of Milan, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, wrote: The Wisdom of God, the Lady Theotokos our Pammakaristos and Conciliation, St. Demetrios Kanavis, St. George the Trophy-bearer of the Phanar, and all ...

I have a guess at what that means, but I'm not sure how to verify whether my guess is on mark or if I'm just makin' stuff up.
I figured you might be able to do better.
We're inundated with junk questions and even worse answers these days. I hate to see the few gems we get go unanswered for lack of expertise.
 
Dan
9:41 PM
@Caleb see my comment? :P
P.S. I am working on answering this question, but I can't find the St. Symeon quote yet and haven't been able to fully understand the exact context in which he said this (to where I am positive I sufficiently understand it). — Dan Jun 2 at 17:02
I never found a source for that quote (most likely it was quoted by a foreign scholar and neither the primary source nor the work that cited it are translated into English yet)
This is a common problem in Orthodox scholarship
 
@Dan Nope, missed that. Now that you mention it, I do remember reading it. Sometime in the past. And then managing to NOT see it sitting there right in front of me the last five times I've opened that question.
 
Dan
@Caleb haha np
 

« first day (636 days earlier)      last day (3075 days later) »