I believe that @curiousdannii is bias against me and has been for some time. I would simply ask that another Mod considers the above link. I believe I have answered all the factors in the Q in a very comprehensive way. Covering all points requested by the person who asked the Q. @curiousdannii doesn't like the answer.

4 Answers 4


Thanks for coming to Meta with this rather than continuing too far into the comments section. Just FYI I didn't get your tag on your Answer as I had not previously interacted with the Answer - however Moderators do get a notification for new Meta posts, so this is where it came up for me.

First off, it's worth saying that as I have written an Answer to this Question myself, that in itself is a potential bias and usually a good reason for any Moderator not to critique other Answers too strongly. However, I would agree with the OP and curiousdannii that your answer does not attempt to answer the given Question about 1 Corinthians 12, and so the post notice appears valid.

In my opinion, the criticisms are valid and unrelated to your conclusions (several non-Trinitarian answers have been received positively by the community), but are rather on the basis that your answer follows just about every approach except exegesis - gathering together various verses and arguments and using them to interpret 1 Corinthians, rather than beginning with the text, examining it carefully and letting it interpret itself.

For example, you speak very strongly against any personification of the Holy Spirit, all whilst answering a question about the passage which at face value seems to have the strongest personification of the "Holy Spirit" found in the New Testament.

I probably wouldn't go as far as to delete the answer given how hard you have evidently worked on it, but would strongly suggest that you ought to check the balance of your content, to ensure that the lion's share of your argument arises from exegesis of the text rather than other texts by different authors.

  • Many thanks Steve - to answer the Q as Dottard appeared to want (see his initially comments to me, all aspects needed to be covered. ie. HS-as you say it is taken as 1 of the strongest passages - if my A is neither, I have to explain why. Which takes a lot of explaining, I cant see how you can A all points without such an exercise of the Text. My second point every Q I have ever looked at has always has much weaker A yet they do not get deleted. its only being deleted because its me - Albeit I know that my answers are controversial & not liked or agreed. Mar 3, 2022 at 9:40
  • Having said the above - I am sorry for taking up your precious time, which is appreciate and accept your judgment as Honest and when I get some time next week I will Edit. Mar 3, 2022 at 9:45
  • Don't worry, post notices are never intended as threats - it's more to serve as user guidance that content needs work. People are trying to help you write better content, by flagging where content is in need of improvement.
    – Steve can help Mod
    Mar 3, 2022 at 9:56
  • 1
    @anothertheory - essentially, Answers on BH.SE aren't supposed to flow "this is my conclusion -> here are some arguments/passages to justify it", but rather should always begin "this is what the text says -> this is what it means in context -> this is what I conclude based on the textual evidence." This is what we mean by the term "exegesis".
    – Steve can help Mod
    Mar 3, 2022 at 9:58
  • Many thanks, appreciated Mar 3, 2022 at 10:11

Comments relating to the question show that the opinion of the Moderator is not 'bias' but is shared by other users :

I did not ask for a rebuttal of the trinity. I asked about what this passage meant. So this does not answer the question. [User 1 - the OP]

Putting together a kaleidoscope of verses to support your conclusion does not answer the question. [User 2]

The crux of the question was not an invitation to write a refutation of a particular doctrine. The heart of the question was quite specific :

If, for the sake of this question we accept that this triplet is NOT discussing the Trinity (as some have asserted), is it effectively saying that the Holy Spirit is "Lord" and "God"?

And I would also agree that the answer under discussion was not a valid answer to the question which had been asked, since the opening argument of the answer stated :

A cogent case cannot be made to support the trinity or Holy Spirit as "Spirit", "Lord" and "God" . . . .

. . . which then confused the answer as only one of those things (and not the other) had been the purpose of the question.

The answer appears to be down-voted but is still (at the time of my writing) open for editing.

  • sorry - the comments you used where before my last 'edit' I did not ask for a rebuttal of the trinity. I asked about what this passage meant. So this does not answer the question. If it does not represent the trinity then would you agree that the triplet represent three names for the Holy Spirit as "Spirit", "Lord" and "God"/ If not what does it mean? Or is it "an odd passage that should be excised from the NT? – Dottard - I answered that it means neither and explained why. Mar 2, 2022 at 11:23
  • - that does answer the question - and its odd and why - to come to my conclusion i provided a comprehensive answre to explain Lord/spirit/HS/God - Dottard did not come back after my last Edit to say I had not answered. Mar 2, 2022 at 11:28
  • 2
    I have read your edited answer and I find that it confuses the question and the doctrine you are trying to refute. It is, at best, unclear (at least to myself). Granted the question is a kind of double negative which requires thinking about. But anyone taking on the task should realise the complexity of the question and needs to be in empathy with its purpose. (In my view.) The answer is still (at this moment) open for further editing, I would note.
    – Nigel J
    Mar 2, 2022 at 11:33
  • due to the complexity - a number of aspects had to be covered - I have broken it down as heading - the readers i believe do understand & it does answer the Q - What you are saying is that it is far from perfect is that the staring point? Also there are vast number of answers in all the questions that are more lacking than this but don't get deleted. I have had no issues with anyone else but @curiousdannii continuously targets me. Nothing would have been said is someone else. Dottard seems to believe it has been answered albeit he would not agree with the answer. Mar 2, 2022 at 12:03
  • Maybe you have hit the nail on the head. Due to the length and complexity of your answer - the question was quite brief - it is (perhaps) difficult to follow. I have noticed that the questions and answers which attract most attention, on Stack Exchange generally and on both SE-C and SE-BH particularly, are brief, succint and non-controversial (I mean by that that they do not attempt to resolve a division, something which is highly unlikely on a website of this nature).
    – Nigel J
    Mar 2, 2022 at 12:11
  • The Q was brief but a lot of points, as you will see from Dottards initial comments as to he felt needed to be covered. The point being the Q has been answered. I note the very high quality / knowledgeable audience who would appreciate a comprehensive answer (albeit may not agree). Again if that was someone else, no one would have threatened to delete it. All I want is a honest judgment - should it be deleted compared to what is not deleted on other Q? Mar 2, 2022 at 12:41
  • I think I have done all I can here and I shall leave the matter to others to comment upon.
    – Nigel J
    Mar 2, 2022 at 12:43
  • Appreciated - I just want another Mod to make a decision - if honestly believes compared to what is left alone - the my A needs edit / delete so be it - I'm arguing principal - (I can put everything I have in a different way or on another Q that's not the point) Mar 2, 2022 at 13:00
  • I'd like give some feedback to moderators who delete answers for not properly addressing the question. It seems to me the site would be better served by moderators downvoting and commenting on such answers, with suggestions for improvement... rather than deleting them. A deletion hits hard especially if the post involved serious effort. IMO deletions should be reserved for answers of very poor quality or which violate decorum rather than not hitting the mark intended by the OP. An answer such as that given by @anothertheory should be left to readers to judge, not expunged. Sep 27, 2022 at 15:15

I believe the answer in its current form is stronger than the original answer; I also believe further editing could make it stronger still.

  • If I were asked to vote on deleting the answer, I would vote "no, do not delete". The answer passed the "low quality posts" check from 2 experienced editors, and the community has given it a net +12 reputation points (2 upvotes, 4 downvotes)
  • If I were the question-asker, I would not select this answer (but of course I'm clearly biased because I wrote an answer to this question too)



It appears to me that this post does offer an answer to the question, but that ~75% of the post is not a direct answer to the question--rather, the bulk of the post is what most writers would include in a footnote. Such "footnote" material is relevant in that it makes the case for the validity of the exegetical landscape in which the answer resides.

After being advised that I tend to write answers that are too long (and sometimes I still do =) ), I took to adding an appendix to posts where background information (supporting my answer but not really answering the question) could be provided. This sometimes produces a short answer and a long appendix building the worldview for the answer. This wasn't my idea--I copied if from Dottard--who graciously hasn't come after me for use of his intellectual property =).

My 2 cents on the answer - a lot of the content is relevant "footnote" material but is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the original question.



Of course this site has a pro-Trinitarian bias, most of the regular contributors on the site hold Trinitarian views.

The site also has a pro-Biblical inerrancy bias, because most of the regular contributors adhere to Biblical inerrancy. The site has a bias in favor of traditional authorship attribution (for the same reason), and somewhat less-pronounced but still present biases in favor of Markan Primacy and in opposition to Catholicism.

There are probably other biases of which I am unaware--and it's a lot harder to recognize the bias when I'm in the majority and those biases exist in a personal blind-spot (I am in the majority on some views and in the minority on others, and I've caught myself in the past using votes to overwhelm a minority view--I have since tried, imperfectly, not to do that).

So what do we, as biased humans, do about it? I don't claim to have a silver bullet here, but at the very least, if I know I have a blind-spot, it's probably wise to do the same thing I do in a car--pause for a moment to look at my blind-spot before cutting somebody off.


This answer is useful

We probably all forget from time-to-time (I know I have), that a +1 to an answer on the main site does not mean "I agree with you" and a downvote does not mean "this is heresy". We're voting on whether a post is useful.

I really, really, really doubt at Judgement Day God is going to ask any of us if we upvoted a post on SE that included something that turned out to be false, heretical, or painted an incomplete picture. But He might ask us how we handled this verse:

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. (Matt. 25:40b)


Some will take exception to my claim that the site has a pro-Trinitarian bias (or a bias on some other topic). I'll offer 2 data-points to corroborate my claim:

  • I have, to date, written 264 answers on this site. My answer to the question we're discussing here is the first time I have written a post on this site explicitly disagreeing with the Nicene Creed and received a net score of +4 or more. I honestly expected my post to get down-voted to Hades, and was pleasantly surprised. Kudos to site members who were willing to vote for an argument they disagreed with
  • There is a user (you know who you are, but I have no interest in publicly shaming anyone) who anonymously downvotes nearly every post I make within a certain specific tag. I respectfully suggest that this approach entirely misses the point of this site.
  • "Kudos to site members who were willing to vote for an argument they disagreed with" It's a good sign, but you shouldn't necessarily assume the upvotes came from people who disagree with you. There are lots of active non-trinitarians on this site.
    – curiousdannii Mod
    Mar 6, 2022 at 1:58
  • @curiousdannii since none of the other active non-trinitarians on the site agree with me (with respect to the Godhead generally, and probably with respect to the description I gave in the post specifically), I'm reasonably confident the votes came from people who disagree with me Mar 6, 2022 at 2:09
  • And, of course, one of the people who upvoted my post specifically identified himself in the comments Mar 6, 2022 at 2:14
  • 1
    Okay, I didn't look closely at the post you linked to.
    – curiousdannii Mod
    Mar 6, 2022 at 2:17
  • 3
    @HoldToTheRod - thank you very much for the above very decent of you to have taken your valuable time to write that, much appreciated. specially when I have very controversial views. I note the tip 'footnotes' which make sense. Kind regards Mar 7, 2022 at 10:11

Other moderator here...

I would choose whether to delete based on what you want other users to see.

I agree with the comments from the OP and other moderators, that you don't address the question, which is about how to understand the passage. You make a theological case concerning the Trinity. While the Question uses the word "Trinity", that does not mean that a proof text concerning Trinitarian beliefs is fitting. An answer should have some kind of explanation of that Bible passage specifically.

Your well-worked answer would be more fitting to answer Questions for and against the doctrine of the Trinity on Christianity.SE. Perhaps your answer here answers a Question already asked on Christianity.SE, in which case you might delete the answer on BH.SE and post it where it is fitting on C.SE. But, I would remind you to be cautious: you thought you were answering a Question here when your answer didn't address the Question; don't make that same mistake on Christianity.SE.

The central issue is to know what a Question is asking and whether an Answer addresses that. All the best!

  • Not perfect A - but see worse on many Q not deleted. A was amended after Dottard comm specifically to address the com feb 23 20:20, which clarifies the Q. The Q really is, does it confirm - i) HS = spirit/Lord/God - if not ii) only possibility Trinity if not iii) is this an odd passage. If the answer is NO to i & ii - you need to explain why. If my answer is NO - its an odd passage, that is not understandable and why - difficulty to explain what it means. Really what is being said is i have to agree to i) or ii) otherwise I cannot answer the Q. My A explains why its neither Mar 9, 2022 at 12:33
  • It's not about one's theology, but about explaining and using Bible study methods to examine the Bible verses.
    – Jesse Mod
    Mar 9, 2022 at 12:44
  • yes to many Q - but this Q was asked in such a way that it needed certain aspect covered. specially when my conclusion is that it is a 'odd' passage - Ans needs to explain the conclusion otherwise not complete. In any event I will amend when I get some time - as it will take a bit of time Mar 9, 2022 at 13:14
  • Theology is allowed, but it's not the main content and Bible study how to understand the Bible passage is required. That should serve as a good compass. All the best!
    – Jesse Mod
    Mar 9, 2022 at 15:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .