@Davïd, Thanks for fixing the Hebrew in my answer. I had typed it up and forgot to go back and fix the gibberish to match the special characters.

@MarkEdward great answer, btw

@MarkEdward What @Daи said. :) It was a quick fix, so thought I'd jump in. I didn't notice the other tweaks later in the quote that you also tidied.

@MarkEdward That was a very frustrating brace of questions, and I'm glad you and a couple others had the patience for some constructive and instructive replies.

@Davïd well said

@Daи I started once or twice, but ... well, I'm glad others did the right thing!

@Daи btw - still no reply from the contact I mentioned. :/ Maybe I'm using a defunct address.

@Davïd it's all good, if it's mean to be, great - if not, so be it

@Daи Indeed! Way late here, btw - quick stop for me. Bye!

@Davïd k adios!

@Davïd yeah when questions stay like this for awhile I sometimes feel like reconsidering my participation here, but every now and then a gem comes along or a crap question gets a good answer

Keeps me hanging on :P

@Daи hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/8347/2215 => "...the single biggest way to keep someone away was to just ignore them. Don't vote - up or down. Don't comment. Don't answer. Don't close. Just... ignore. ..." shog9

@Daи ... so ... hard ... >.<

@Davïd well, I DV

@Davïd you want to ignore the trolls ("don't feed the trolls"), but I DV noise so that signal can be found more easily

@Davïd so far we don't have too many trolls, our issue isn't folks posting maliciously as much as folks doing no prerequisite research and not bothering to even Google for an answer to their own question

@Davïd from the post linked to:

Here's how you guide new users: Lead by example, and treat them with respect. Even if you don't feel like it, even if you don't think they deserve it, even if they react badly to it anyway. If something needs editing, edit it. If something needs down-voting, down-vote it. If something needs critiquing, critique it. Patiently explain why. Answer questions, ask for feedback, stand your ground when you're right, and be willing to admit when you're wrong.

Definitely hard. I tend to be blunt which many interpret as being mean, which doesn't help. The reality is that I have auto-scripted comments and I've crafted them to not exceed the maximum character limit when combined with the welcome message - so they are often 'to the point' out of necessity

@Davïd and in the case of the user I left that comment on, he has a history of asking poor questions without doing any initial research and most of his questions can be answered with a simple Wikipedia article or other search

once you demonstrate that you are not trying, I will not try to be nice any more. I will call you out on wasting people's time and creating noise rather than signal

but that's my personality. I'll bend over backwards for a user who actually tries and means well, even if they aren't getting it (same with students)

In my life I have met many KJV onlyists (used to be one before I started learning Hebrew). Then a few years ago, I met a ESV onlyists and found there were more. Now, a Young's Literal Onlyist.

@FrankLuke yep haha

@FrankLuke and to the quixotic folks who say they are original languages only, I then ask, "Which manuscript(s)? Which readings?" :P

@Daи Yes! And Armaic Primacy should be on my list also.

@Caleb, I wonder if this Question could or should be migrated to Christianity SE from a Freewill perspective? Or, perhaps you could help @JLB know how to reframe it for this site. He is willing to fix it. I just think it is a bit over my head how to bring it out of it's doctrinal framework and frame it textually as I am not sure what would constitute minimal research.

@FrankLuke indeed

@Sarah I'm not sure why it needed to be edited after your edit. I thought the question was fine just like this

but even now it isn't horrible, it is still a textual question primarily - although now it has the beginnings of an answer commingled with it

The text deals with theology, but that is a valid aspect of the text in this case, the question is primarily focused on the text (that just so happens to ask about theology)

so it could even stay as it is now in my opinion

@Caleb what say you?

@Sarah I don't see anything in there that makes in a CSE question. It is a closer match to here right now and I'm pretty sure what he is after is not a doctrinal answer from some theological corner but an analysis of the possibilities that fit the text.

@Daи Pretty much same opinion. It would need a radical edit to fit on CSE (I havn't looked at the history, only the current version) and unless it is going to get closed here I wouldn't recommend trying to shoe-horn it into CSE.

@Caleb @Dan Thanks for looking at this. I am not familiar with CSE. So, would the general recommendation be that he simply move the answer out of the question and into an answer? Do I understand also that there does not then need to be any indication of research if he is posting his own answer?

@Sarah I thought the previous version of the question as you had edited it was fine, but it could even stay as is (and at this point it might be best just to leave it be)

@Sarah this question is actually a really good example of what I was talking about in chat the other day. The theological aspects of this text are valid and on topic, since that is what the text is talking about to some extent. Good answers will address those theological aspects using the modes of discourse of history, linguistics, and literary studies/criticism

for instance, "Christian commentator X taught Y about this text" is a perfectly valid way to address the theological aspects from a historical perspective, and there are other valid ways as well

@Daи OK, thanks. I can see that. I think I have a good grip on the core of the forum; but some of the subtleties still trip me up. Mostly with this one was that there already was an answer on board; I wasn't quite sure how to handle it. He seems to really be trying to acclimate to the forum and I did not want to steer him wrong.

@Sarah yeah the subtleties scan be confusing, and not all of us agree on them - but this one I'm pretty sure we're on the same page that's it's fine