I think it might be helpful if any who did not understand why they had to be halted could be made to understand why the threads were problematic. I want now to be specific about the perils inherent in those two threads. One of those threads concerned the question whether list-members think the doctrine of inerrancy and authentic scholarship are incompatible. Now this is obviously a question to which some list-members may very well feel they would answer positively while others think there is no relationship at all between the two. But whatever list-members may personally feel about that question, it was really NOT a proper topic for discussion, because it must almost certainly rouse the passions of people who feel strongly on either side of that question.
Mutual respect is earned by the demonstration of mutual respect.
Much of this discussion and of the earlier discussion on chapters 1 and 3 of 1 John had been quite fruitful, or had seemed so, although it appeared to be getting repetitive at the time it was suggested it should be taken off-list. Quite simply that it shifted its focus from what the text of those two verses in 1 John could reasonably be understood to mean in their Greek formulation to the question whether there are contradictions in the Biblical text. Once that area is entered, the peace of the list is disturbed and the passions of list-members become inflamed. And that's why the Edward Hobbs, as Chair of the BG-Staff, intervened to call a halt to the thread. I hope what happened last week, if its implications are understood, may be instructive and conducive to better interaction on the list.