-7

What is your problem ? Why do you post questions and then just delete answers you do not agree with or understand. What a huge waste of time

0
8

You have one post that was deleted by a moderator. It was not deleted because it wasn't understood, it was deleted because it didn't meet the basic requirements imposed on all answers on this site. The moderator who deleted it left you a comment with an explanation already, but let me expand a little bit.

Most importantly you didn't really answer the question that was asked. You posted some related thoughts about one of the verses in the question, but barely touched the core issue of the question. Where you did touch on an answer, you only asserted it was so without showing how you arrived at that interpretation which is a requirement on this site. This is not a discussion forum and things work pretty differently from what you may expect. Do read the what makes us different post you were already directed to.

Additionally—and this isn't why your post was deleted but it sure doesn't help—the post is very difficult to read. You should consider being more careful about your writing style and formatting. We prefer an academic tone over looser grammar like you might post in a Facebook comment. Repeated use of all-caps (which indicate yelling rather than the emphasis you may have intended), odd strings of punctuation that don't mean anything (e.g. ",,,,,"), and failure to capitalize normal things like proper names and the start of sentences makes posts look sloppy even if they have good content.

2

To expand on Caleb's comments, it is important to note that no moderators on this site are "self-appointed". Moderators are elected by the community to moderatorship by providing exemplary work. The community then votes (up or down) on said answers to receive a reputation score. Only after achieving sufficient reputation score are moderators able to do things such as delete answers.

This means moderators are regarded by their community as

  1. Experts who generally understand complicated hermeneutics
  2. Elected by their peers

You also had some comments deleted, but the bar for doing such is extremely low. Nearly anyone can flag a comment and comments will be deleted for reasons such as "too chatty", "obsolete" or even just "other".

This site is not just for answering questions, but also asking them. You might wish to try asking some questions instead and observing the answers you receive and then attempting to emulate the style and level of scholarship those questions generate.

1
  • 2
    +1 but the mods are appointed by SE for beta sites like this: elections will be held in the future sometime Jan 7 '16 at 15:08
0

A "Humane" Touch

It has long been my contention that the vast majority of users on BHSE are enthusiasts, and not 'credentialed academics'. Though there are a few, they have a plethora of other avenues to interact with other 'peers', plus conferences, peer reviews, academic papers, and students, which 'pay' for their service.

This leaves the vast pool of frustrated programmers who perhaps attended Bible school, dropped out of seminary, or those even like myself, who own a bible and know how to read, an opportunity to examine the nuances of the text in an attempt to more clearly understand it's meaning.

Unlike academia, we didn't have the 'finishing school' of how to present and exposit our ideas, and we may have come from the rough and tumble world of blogs, where shouting your conclusions the loudest and demeaning those who disagree is an acceptable form of communication.

Therefore...

As a conciliatory offer to those who 'visit' us for the 1st or 2nd time an attempt should be made to 'reconcile' their unvarnished contributions to something that more closely resembles our Site Directives. Although we primarily do this through reviews, 'suggestions' as how to improve their posts as well as specific insight into what a reviewer finds objectionable is much more helpful than VtC's and a "Here's the Rulebook-Read It", which many 1st time(myself at one time) contributors found offensive and parochial-the perception is, "If You Aren't One Of Us Already, Then You Don't Belong Here".

I realize this takes patience-and in an age where a society that measures Gigabytes and Nanoseconds, it is in very short supply. But I can testify as a once "unbridled colt" that a little patience and an attempt to 'understand' can have a far greater impact than dropping the hammer.

5
  • 2
    I think you might be heavily discounting the Stack Exchange Theory of Moderation and its' effectiveness. Jan 28 '16 at 6:44
  • @JamesShewey I do discount the SE Theory of Moderation for one basic, profound, yet simple reason: it Is the Bible. It contains the "words of life", it contains eternal truths, and it contains a clear concise message by which all men must live their lives. It is not a book of history, although history is contained in it. It is not a book of poetry, although poetry is contained in it. It is not a book of science, although it is the true 'judge' of what science is (and isn't). It is a book of Truth, and it must be seen as such.
    – Tau
    Jan 28 '16 at 13:48
  • @JamesShewey Consequently, those that share this view(and there are many) are not solving a physics problem, or finding another way to write a line of code. These exercises can be conducted in an academically 'neutral' setting where a variety of views are presented and the one that 'best' solves the problem gets upvoted. Those who's views don't line up can go back and recheck their figures without making a 'moral commitment' as to the outcome. Not so with the Bible: 1) It is not neutral, 2) Those that read(study, pray, meditate) upon it are not neutral either.
    – Tau
    Jan 28 '16 at 14:06
  • @JamesShewey (Finally) Therefore, I make an exception with those who 1st(or 2nd) time visit us: they have " moral convictions", and whether or not I agree with them, I respect the fact that they also view the Bible as more than religious text. I do believe in the purposes of this site, and I do believe that we can learn from one another. But I recognize that "moral convictions" cannot be factored out, nor do we want them to. This goes against the grain of SE's "Academic Neutrality" policy so it's necessary to 'coach' new users(IMO) how to participate, yet respect their beliefs.
    – Tau
    Jan 28 '16 at 14:31
  • @Tau The Bible, It contains the "words of life", it contains eternal truths, and it contains a clear concise message by which all men must live their lives. It is not a book of history, although history is contained in it. It is not a book of poetry, although poetry is contained in it. It is not a book of science, although it is the true 'judge' of what science is (and isn't). It is a book of Truth, and it must be seen as such. Bravo! The truth and nothing but the truth!
    – Witness
    Sep 14 '16 at 14:37

You must log in to answer this question.