Avoid truth assertions

Avoid truth assertions

**Avoid truth assertions**

We want a site with broad appeal that welcomes diverse perspectives.
This site focuses on the *text* and the 
process of interpreting it, using tools such as language, history, 
archaeology, and science.  None of that is inherently 
religious, which is what *distinguishes* BH from other Internet sites about the bible.

One of our core tenets is that hermeneutical process is (or ought to be) open to examination
from all sides. Religious claims are often not open to examination. Not only that, but
they're polarizing.  Therefore, unqualified statements of religious truth are 
out of place here; this is a site about hermeneutics, not a site about Truth.<sup>1</sup>

Welcoming assertions of religious truth drives away some key groups of
users, to the detriment of the site.  This has been raised on meta
by several users.<sup>2</sup>  If the current trend continues we will lose
the Hebrew-bible-based, rabbinic persepctive, since few Christian users here
have any background there.  **Allowing religious assertions
of truth reduces the chances of getting the broad content we want.**

In theory we already welcome all perspectives, and that's true to the extent
that "welcome" means "accept questions and answers from". But that's not really
welcoming; it's just not barring the door. To be truly *welcoming* we should
be striving to *not unnecessarily make people uncomfortable**. For instance,
insisting on the truth of a divisive statement creates a hostile environment.
Using qualified language instead just seems neighborly.

An important measure of site success is user participation:
if users don't continue to supply new, quality content, 
then eventually traffic will drop off.  Area 51 
[lists](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/1817?phase=beta&users=mostactive#tab-top)
top users based on participation; of the top 10, four are mostly inactive 
and one more has a long record of low-quality posts.  The next 10 don't fare much better; 
more than half of them contribute minimally or not at all now.  *This trend should concern us.*

This is not about individuals. There is no outcome that will please everyone and we need to 
recognise that whatever we choose will suit some and alienate others. This is not the aim of 
course but we must persue the best long-term goal for the site.


<sup>1</sup> [This meta post from C.SE](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/a/1380/4145)
explains a similar philosophy

<sup>2</sup> [1](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/730/208)
[2](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/671/208)
[3](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/677/208)
[4](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/683/208)
[5](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/594/208)
[6](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/696/208)