Please could we get some more perspectives on this question? Some people seem fairly sure it's either too-broad or inevitably generates primarily opinion-based answers, and others seem sure that it's good as-is.

Caleb's normally a great plumb-line for understanding the scope of questions and how they fit the site, but as it's his question I'm not sure whether there's bias in-play here or whether he's genuinely on track with this.

It's not a great question (and the answers are worse). The reason I'm defending it actually has more to do with defending hermeneutical-approaches questions in general than this question in specific.

This was from early BH beta and is not very well formulated, but it's been drug through the close vote review queue several times now and I think people get stuck in a rut thinking about this sites bread and butter exegesis questions and try to apply guidelines for those to a question that is about the field rather than a specific verse. The same thing has happened to my other questions in this genre.

@SteveTaylor If the arguments against it consistently added up to "Too broad" maybe I'd buy it, but most of the arguments to date lead off with something about it being opinion based or not about a specific text. And those are points I just don't thing apply the same way to this type of question as they do to textual questions.

@Caleb You're right enough that most of us went with 'Primarily Opinion Based' on a first impression of the question, but your counter-point to that is that it's a question for documenting different established approaches to the role of the Holy Spirit in exegesis.

Whilst it's fair to say that it is possible to give an academic, non-opinion-based answer demonstrating this for a subset of the question's scope, if one were to attempt to do so in a way that addressed the whole question, it would inevitably create an answer far too long for the format.

Which to me is demonstrated fairly well by the fact that the question hasn't had a single answer in six years which has gone a substantive way towards actually addressing the bulk of the question.

@SteveTaylor @Caleb Well, if it gets closed I'll just have to start a campaign to re-open it. :) A decent answer (or even the semi-decent one [I hope] that I have in mind to post myself ... someday when time permits) is certainly possible. There's no denying it's fairly broad in scope, but I think the site will be impoverished if we lose Q&As like this one. FWIW. YMMV.

"Half of All Languages Come from One Root Language. How it Spread Is Something of Debate"

^^^^ Too bad that can't "one-box" -- it would look quite cool. I reckon some folks who drop in to The Library would find that quite interesting (@Susan? @curiousdannii?) . . .

@Susan The next instalment of the Petrovich saga. Sad. And weird.