Methods of Theological Discovery
The site stance criteria
This site is a Christian site with a stated standpoint: biased only toward Christ and His Word. It would be dishonest to present a method that presupposes naturalism as though the site endorsed it, and dishonest to omit that method or misrepresent it. So every method carries a disclosed stance, with a written justification and a named reviewer. The stance is a judgment the site owns, never a filter: a method the site questions is presented with its strongest case and its best practitioners, and any reader may run it in the Workshop.
The five stances
Endorsed
The site affirms this method as a legitimate and valuable way of doing theology.
Permitted
The site regards this method as legitimate but not normative; users may use it.
Reported
The site presents this method accurately as a feature of the field but does not endorse it.
Cautioned
The site presents this method and flags specific concerns, with reasons.
Rejected
The site regards this method as methodologically unsound or theologically incompatible with its own commitments, and says so with reasons.
Where the assignments stand
No stance assignments stand yet. The assignments wait on the named reviewers, the same reviewer naming the Christian Assessment verdicts wait on. Until a reviewer is named, every method page states that standing plainly rather than carrying an unexamined default. A stance, once assigned, is revisable with a documented rationale, and the assignments are reviewed twice a year.
Criteria version 1.0.