Possible solution to frequent question closures, edits, migrations, and mission dilution at Biblical Hermeneutics: Floating the idea of a new site

Question

Biblical Hermeneutics is a great SE site which has benefited many and will continue to do so. I have noticed, however, that a lot of energy is expended on trying to educate people about the true mission of the site and what hermeneutics really is. Many first time users post questions about the Bible which get flagged as off-topic, and many answers fall outside of the intended scope of the site which creates a lot of extra work for moderators and editors, and creates confusion about the true purpose here. From what I have observed from the editing queues, the problem has been increasing lately.

It has occurred to me that a possible solution for this would be to create a site that would be more suited for the questions that get rejected here and at the sister site, which would address people’s interest in more specifically practical applications of scripture to their daily lives. For example, a question like,

“What does it mean for a believer to take up their cross daily and follow Christ?”

would probably get closed on this site and on Christianity SE, as well, for not meeting statement of purpose criteria. I think a lot of people are interested in the practical application of scripture without wanting or being qualified to engage academically with a passage or approach it from the standpoint of a particular denomination.

There have been some concerns expressed on the site about sermonizing and our new moderator recently cautioned a new user about being too preachy, while recognizing that he himself has not been immune to the temptation. A user named Dan, in his answer to the following question,

The false dichotomy between "faith-based" hermeneutics and "let the text speak for itself" hermenuetics

made this suggestion:

“We can describe the original author's intent, even passionately—but we must not cross the line into preaching to BH.SE readers.”

There was just recently an involved discussion on Meta about whether a particular question should by closed, migrated, or modified. This looks like a well-masked theological question I think the right action was taken and the community seemed to be in strong agreement. The question would not have been appropriate for the sister site, and it wouldn’t be for the new proposed site either. But I have seen some questions migrated from one site that were then challenged as being appropriate at the new one.

The following question was recently migrated to Christianity SE.

"Scriptural support - Measuring our salvation, God's love and blessings". https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86716/54851

Technically it wasn't the best fit over there either because, for one, it doesn’t specify a particular denominational perspective. It could however be appropriate for the new site because it has a practical application raising questions like,

“Why would we be seeking the wealth of the world when the wealth of heaven is ours?”

I believe there would be a healthy demand for a site that would even welcome “sermons” that address the practical application of the Bible to daily living as long as they are well-reasoned and biblically supported. A possible description for the new site could be Biblical Homiletics, but a more universally appealing one might be better received. Other suggestions are welcome.

I believe that a site like that would expand the influence of the study of the Bible and Christianity because people would be able to ask more practical questions relevant to their daily lives that might get rejected on the current sites. It would also reduce the need for so much housekeeping - so a win-win solution. Bible Hermeneutics will be able to more fully devote itself to academic exegesis which was the original intent of the site.

I have even recently heard people lamenting the “good old days” when academic rigor was more prevalent on the site. People who are more attracted to understanding how to apply the Bible to their lives today will post on the alternative site and not bother to post borderline off-topic or more general, pragmatic questions on BH.

It’s just an idea I had that seems worth exploring and I would love to hear your feedback. Thanks!

Answer 1

Yes, a third site can fill the needs for visitors whose questions cannot be answered in Christianity.SE and Biblical Hermeneutics.SE because of the established on-topic and scoping rules that have been developed by both communities in the past 10 years.

From my personal observation, it seems Christianity.SE is best called Christian Studies which includes all things about Christianity that goes into a History of Christianity book which necessarily includes: theology, important people, church development, scripture development, creed development, denominations, practices, etc. That is why objectivity (being the main trait of the historical discipline) goes hand in hand with the site but personal application is out. The goal of the site is the assist believers to have the facts to make their own personal decision on which denomination to choose, and then to assist them in studying their own faith in more detail.

Similarly, BH.SE is about responsible interpretation (which is largely objective within a set of hermeneutical pre-commitments) which for most Christian denominations should precede personal applications.

In my opinion, to ensure that the new site has a chance of launching from Area 51 the 3rd site needs to have

• a large enough boundary (to ensure enough interest)

• a very clear reason-for-existence (to distinguish it from C.SE and BH.SE). Sample formula:

  Exegesis (BH.SE) + Theology (C.SE) ---> Application (BA.SE)

• a certain measure of objectivity (to ensure high signal-to-noise ratio, which is the key benefit of all Stack-Exchange family of sites compared to Reddit)

So far, Biblical Applications seems to be the predominant interest. Personally, I would like to see theological criteria to be included so the basis for the application can be both Bible and/or doctrine. This will then be more comfortable for Catholics and LDS who have additional source of authority apart from the Bible. The name could then be Christian Applications or Christian Living.

But if applications is the focus which necessarily includes an element of advice and opinion, the new site will need to sacrifice some objectivity. A side effect would be that each answer would be voted more for its usefulness rather than its correctness unless the site makes it clear that "correctness" is defined as the voter judging whether Biblical quotations or Christian doctrines in the answer has been "rightly applied" to the question. A new "versioning feature" can very well solve this issue !

@Bach's idea of Bible.SE is interesting, considering the 3 sample questions in the areas of Biblical cosmology, Bible translation, and Bible archaeology that don't find a comfortable place in C.SE and BH.SE. But in my opinion, all 3 could have been officially accommodated in BH.SE as ancillary topics. Since applications cannot be in scope for Bible.SE I'm afraid the proposed site is not going to be big enough to be able to survive Area 51 launch criteria.

Site Name

As for the naming, I agree with curiousdannii that 'Christian Theology' is not a good name, since that's what Christianity.SE covers in addition to Church history, etc. Suggested names so far:

User	Name
Jesse Steele	Biblical Homily & Devotionals
Martin Hemsley	Bible for Life Bible Applications
Polyhat Steve Taylor	Biblical Application(s)
Peter Turner GratefulDisciple	Christian Living

Side by side comparison

Note: the chart is meant for highlighting the differences to make the case for the new site. Of course, the criteria under the 4th (BA) column is open to discussion; it's meant for initial idea.

Aspect	Christianity	Biblical Hermeneutics	Biblical Applications
Single Keyword Differentiator	Theology	Exegesis	Application
Main audience	Christians / scholars familiar with theology	Christians / scholars familiar with exegesis	Christians of all stripes focusing on applications, Christians new to formal study of theology / exegesis, Non-Christians curious about Christianity
Main purpose	Precise theological study prior to application	Precise exegetical study prior to application	Introduction and Application
On-topic	Theology (scoped) Church doctrine Biblical basis Church history Christian studies Christian Philosophy Resources and Facts	Exegesis Hermeneutics Manuscript Critical approaches	Common questions from new/non- Christians Introductory inquiry Biblical application Theological application Discipleship & Spirituality Apologetics
Off topics	Personal Advice Why God ... General Philosophy Truth questions	No Bible text Non Bible books	Personal Advice Non-Christian topics
Style	Academic	Academic	Pastoral
Question Scope	Denomination	Text	None or larger groups a
Opinion	No	No	Yes
Answer acceptance	According to scope, supported by citation	Plausible interpretation, supported by citation	Plausible biblical application, supported by existing practice
Answer voting	Most correct	Most correct	Most useful or Most "correct" b
Measure of "correctness"	What does this theology teach about X?	What does text X supposed to mean?	What does the Bible teach about X?

^a : Scope can be larger groups than in Christianity.SE, and overlapping. Such as: Mainstream (Nicene) Christianity, LDS, JW, Unitarian, Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, Pentecostal, etc.

^b : "correctness" can be defined as the voter judging whether Biblical quotations in the answer has been "rightly applied" to the question, although this evaluation by necessity is more subjective than in C.SE

Sample accepted questions

1. “What does it mean for a believer take up their cross daily and follow Christ?”

   • C.SE : How was the term 'The Cross' understood by the audience of Jesus? (Catholic perspective)
   • BH.SE : How was 'let him take up his cross' understood by Jesus's audience?
   • BA.SE : “What does it mean for a believer take up their cross daily and follow Christ?”

2. “Why would we be seeking the wealth of the world when the wealth of heaven is ours?”

   • C.SE : How does Reformed theology refute prosperity theology?
   • BH.SE : Does 2 Corinthians 9:6 indicate a reaping of earthly wealth?
   • BA.SE : “Why would we be seeking the wealth of the world when the wealth of heaven is ours?”

3. “How can we pray without ceasing?”

   • C.SE : How do Cessasionists interpret 1 Thessalonians 5:20?
   • BH.SE : Is Acts 1:14 describing something like 24/7 prayer?
   • BA.SE : “How can we pray without ceasing?”

4. “Does Revelation give us any insight on when to expect the rapture?”

   • C.SE : How would the four major eschatological views differ in their interpretation of Revelation 21:4?
   • BH.SE : Is it right to textually and contextually insist that Revelation 3:10 is a "slam dunk" for the pretrib rapture position?
   • BA.SE : “Does Revelation give us any insight on when to expect the rapture?”

5. “What does the Bible say about (topic)?”

   • C.SE : What does (theology/denomination) say about (topic)?
   • BH.SE : What does (bible verse) say about (topic)?
   • BA.SE : “What does the Bible say about (topic)?”

Answer 2

Thanks for that thoughtful input, @Steve Taylor. A name like Christian Theology might have the same type of intimidating effect for the type of users we might attract as Homiletics. I like the initials though. Maybe Christianity Today would work. People who are attracted to theology will probably be more interested in the existing sites. It could be more difficult to distinguish theology questions from hermeneutic and doctrinal ones than from homiletic ones. Most question about the nature of God, or Christology would be better suited for hermeneutics than homiletics.

I’m sure you know I agree with you about the new user experience and the fact that “people often have real questions and no place to have them answered”. What happens to these people is that they get discouraged and disappear, never to return. You see that by number of people who remain with a 1 or some low number beside their name. If we can provide a site that is more suited to their needs, I think the other sites will benefit as well since there will be a larger group of people on the site who are interested in Christianity and Bible Study in its different forms. That attracts attention from outside to all the sites. It should also alleviate the problem of lower tier questions without a useful answer. It sounds like there are not a few on this site and probably on Christianity SE as well who would appreciate having a place to send the preachers. :)

The difference between the proposed site and a Life Advice site is the commitment to a unique, agreed upon source of truth. We would not be looking for relativistic opinions, but facts and reasoning based on what the Bible says. On a site where God is honored, there should be order. I notice that you have done some good work yourself avoiding wars on BH. The shared criteria for evaluating answers would be which ones are most biblically based, not opinion or historic doctrine based.

There may not be many questions coming from a CT type site to BH, but that’s the point. They don’t meet the requirements. But if someone asked a question about the intent or meaning of a particular text that had no practical application, or if they had translations questions, or an interest in historical context, those questions could be directed to BH. I would try to give them some guidance about how to best ask those questions here so that they would have a better chance for success.

As I mentioned before, I believe the new site would draw people that may not feel comfortable participating on either C or BH. When they try, it usually doesn’t turn out well and they often get greeted with a curt, “This question has been closed” notice or "Please take a site tour". Most of them will never get the hang of hermeneutics. They don’t know much about Christian history, doctrine, or exegesis, but they do know their Bible, because they read it every day with devotion.

I think it would be a great testimony and a benefit to a wide range of people if Bible Hermeneutics and Christianity would work together to support a new site like this. It would increase the Christian presence on SE and be a powerful demonstration of Christians working together in their different capacities to spread the Good News while helping people grow in knowledge, faith, and practice. BH will not be losing people that they can’t retain, but directing them to a place where they can serve and be served.

Answer 3

To me, the missing scope would probably be something like Biblical Application.

Where it all begins

New SE sites are born from a single womb:

https://area51.stackexchange.com/

Area 51 is where users build proposals for new SE sites, working to get buy-in from like-minded users and clearly defining the site scope, until the point where a new SE site can be birthed into 'Beta' mode. You could certainly begin building a proposal there and find a sufficient number users from BH.SE and other places to come on-board as willing to support the proposal as a new site in its Beta, which takes a lot of care and attention.

Likely Challenges

The given reason for closing many questions on the site is "Off-Topic", but the reason the On-Topic rules were crafted in the first place were to make questions answerable and avoid opinion-based answers. Over many years the BH.SE user community and previous moderators crafted the On-Topic guidance to ensure higher quality questions.

I sympathise with the new-user experience and the fact that people often have real questions and no place to have them answered - but from a site perspective, one danger to beware is trying to rescue off-topic questions and squeeze them until they fit the BH.SE mould. Sometimes all we end up doing is creating a tier of lower quality questions that feel a bit fluffy and don't have a clear answer, when it's perfectly okay to just say "this isn't the place for that type of question".

One of the challenges with creating a SE site is creating a sensible scope that means answers have some kind of objective qualitative value - please see Real Questions Have Answers for more thoughts there!

There are some SE sites which are more like advice-giving sites rather than cited answer sites (I've read concerns from some of their moderators, but can't recall which sites specifically... is there a Life Advice site or something?) where you could have more relativistic answers as you're suggesting above, but to me that would be inviting several different manifestations of chaos:

1. For BH.SE, our usual measure for success is "what is the text supposed to mean?" and so this helps us avoid wars between different theological viewpoints. For BA.SE you may have a theological question that erupts into a war between different theological camps, I struggle to see shared criteria for which is better, besides the number of voters you have from those camps. (which we have occasionally struggled with here)

2. It would take a lot of work to carve out the scope to be clearly and meaningfully different from BH.SE - it's easy to conceive of shifting off-topic questions into the BA.SE site, but I struggle to think what the exact criteria would be for shifting content the other way. i.e. at what stage do you say "this isn't fundamentally a Biblical Application question, it's a question about the intent or meaning of a passage." and migrate it over?

Answer 4

Some of the picture I see for the potential new site.

Biblical Applications

Purpose: To address questions related to the Bible, its languages and cultures, Biblical archeology, or applications of these as may be supported by Biblical or historical evidence.

Question etiquette:

Question Characteristic	Acceptability	Textual Rationale/Support (KJV)
Sincere	Desirable	That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ. (Philippians 2:10)
Seeking Biblical support	Desirable	Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. (John 5:39)
Joking, jesting, sarcasm, mocking, cynicism	Unwelcome	Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. (Ephesians 5:4)
Plain/simple (uncomplicated)	Desirable	Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: (2 Corinthians 3:12)
Focused on Christ and the Gospel	Desirable	For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. (1 Corinthians 2:2)
Mining deeper truths	Desirable	But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. (1 Corinthians 2:10)
Ignorant question	Allowed	And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: (Acts 17:30) And it shall be forgiven all the congregation of the children of Israel, and the stranger that sojourneth among them; seeing all the people were in ignorance. (Numbers 15:26)
Questions of a contentious, provocative nature	Disallowed	The beginning of strife is as when one letteth out water: therefore leave off contention, before it be meddled with. (Proverbs 17:4) Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another. (Galatians 5:26)

(I may update the list as I think of additional Biblically supported points.)

Essentially, the entire new site should be governed on the basis of Biblical principle; on a "thus saith the Lord." If there is not a good principle upon which to accept or reject a person's contribution, it is better to err on the side of that person, thus acceptance would be the default action. We should seek to be as uncritical and unjudgmental of others as possible, and to err on the side of mercy. That said, there are limits, and the Bible can help us to define those.

It would be expected that answers would be ranked according to their quality and Biblical support by the votes of other participants.

In the event that a question sought denominational perspectives, it should be transferred to Christianity, Judaism, or wherever it may best be addressed. If the question was strictly hermeneutical in nature, it should be moved to BH.SE. But no question should be lightly moved or transferred that could foreseeably be rejected outright at the destination platform.

Because critics and objectors naturally tend to elevate their voices above others, I feel it would be appropriate to raise the bar for close votes above the number required to reopen; e.g. 6 votes to close, 4 votes to reopen--or something like this. A moderator should still be able to close a question without the help of other members.

Answer 5

Biblical Homily & Devotionals

The name

The biggest problem—albeit quite small—is that the name "Biblical Homiletics" sounds too similar to "Biblical Hermeneutics". Secondly, that people who stand to learn the most from answers are less likely to know the difference between "hermeneutics" and "homiletics" and could get them confused on a freshman vocabulary quiz. The initials would also be "BH".

But, a three-word name, such as ELU and ELL, with both being similar, the second likely created for similar reasons, and sharing the first two letters, this works well: BH and BHD (Biblical Hermeneutics and Biblical Homily & Devotionals).

I argue for "Devotionals" in the plural in order to be utterly clear. Everyone would know the purpose of the site, merely by the name. The plural is also a little more open to a plurality of methods and ideas, which seems to be part of your aim. Most pastors may look at the title and naturally expect it to be a great place to find inspiration for the next "My Utmost for His Highest" by Oswald Chambers.

About your idea

I think you're right on the money. Your defense, background, and considerations explain it well. But, actually creating a new site may largely be a matter of logistics, both for software dev and whether BH has enough overlapping members that it would not create confusion.

Certainly, with the uptick in activity that moderator Steven Taylor observes, and Dr. C's concern about dups, a new site may help resolve many matters... maybe. It has merit, but needs a review of logistics.

I remain very curious as to what other mods have to say because I am so new to this, and I have no experience on how a new site impacts the community.

Answer 6

I think the idea is superb and would solve a lot of problems that keep returning to BH. Many different names have been proposed for this new site. But my proposal is to call it simply "Bible SE".

I think the focus of this new baby site is shifting from biblical topics (which can be answered somewhat objectively), to a pastoral site where people can post their own spiritual and theological problems. I think this is a big mistake, and if we go down this road it will become another Christianity SE, something we don't want. It will also naturally attract lots of lower quality posts in my opinion, since there is no way to objectively answer these questions, and essentially anyone (even ones who are not qualified to answer) can have an opinion on these topics and post them with confidence.

For example, how can @gratefuldesciple's question "What does it mean for a believer take up their cross daily and follow Christ?" be objectively answered? Do we want the new site to be focused on subjective questions like these (thereby attracting lower quality posts), or do we want questions which require some level of expertise and experience from the community?

The way I see it, this new site should be focused on bible related topics. As it stands now, BH does not allow for "bible related topics", and any question that fails to quote a passage from the bible in their post is at risk of being closed. So Bible SE would be coming to solve exactly that. Topics ranging from archaeology, biblical geography, biblical history (perhaps this topic is better suited on History SE??), theology, biblical figures, significance of biblical narratives, are all welcome on B SE. Devotional and spiritual topics (as long as they are related to the bible) would be welcome too (as it would attract a less academic crowd too), but that shouldn't be the focus of this new site, since C SE already serves that purpose.

While BH is now focused on a specific niche, i.e., hermeneutics, philology and textual analysis, bible SE would be much broader than that, encompassing many different fields related to the bible, as I have enumerated above. For example, a long time ago I posted a question about the geographical location of Sinai. Since I couldn't post it on BH, and Christianity didn't feel like the right place for it either, I ended up posting it on History SE, and naturally it got downvoted, even though the question was well written. However, now that we are launching this new site (which I would call Bible SE), my question about the location of Sinai would be a perfect fit! So are questions like this and this welcome. This way, academics and non-academics alike can participate and contribute to this site.

I think there's also a need to dig deeper and figure out and define what is considered off-topic on this new site, if not there will be a lot overlapping between C SE and B SE, and the lines will become blurred. I think for example this question currently on C SE, should be considered off-topic on B SE, since in my opinion "prayer" as such is not a biblical topic, although it is mentioned many times in the bible. It can be a bible related topic though if it's asked in the context of the bible, i.e., how "prayer" is viewed in the bible (even without a specific bible passage as BH requires). But since this is asking for guidance on prayer it should not be allowed on B SE. Other may disagree with me, and it is very important to discuss this here. I am not yet entirely clear what should be considered off-topic on this site, and I welcome other users input on this.