Been told that you don't know a subject

[Kitsune]

You ever discussed with a person of a certain religious background and looking at it from the outside, you observe certain things about the religion.
You are then told that you know nothing about the belief systems.

Been told this by Catholics and 90% of the time they are saying the same thing I was but just tangent it.

What are good responses?

[Darth Wong]

You ever discussed with a person of a certain religious background and looking at it from the outside, you observe certain things about the religion.
You are then told that you know nothing about the belief systems.

Been told this by Catholics and 90% of the time they are saying the same thing I was but just tangent it.

What are good responses?

Usually, I say something like "Nonsense. This religion was invented by and for illiterate goat herders three thousand years ago. It's only complicated if you waste your time analyzing every word and phrase. The basic point of it was deliberately designed to be so simple that a child or a simpleton could understand it. People only invoke the complexities as a distraction tactic when someone points out that the basic idea is stupid."

[Singular Intellect]

I had a recent similar situation with my sister in law...I was explaining why I bought a hybrid car, given the world wide oil crisis. She blew me off by saying I needed to "read more", that there wasn't an oil shortage and she previously worked in the oil industry. (ya, me too, I pumped gas for a year at a convience store)

I decided to memorize simple facts like world/country oil consumption rates, oil reserves and other assorted information I've been reading about for quite awhile.

Next time I plan to test to see if she has a fucking clue what she's talking about.

[Mayabird]

When I dated that Mormon my freshman year of college, I studied up on Mormonism, what it's about, read that horrible holy book of theirs, history, and even found some ex-Mormon support sites.

When I would respond to things he said with what I'd learned, he told me that I didn't understand, or it's something different, but it all basically boiled down to me not knowing the religion because I'm not a Mormon.

My response? I broke up with him. (Granted, the "You can be my spirit wife and produce the souls of our bajillions of spirit children on the planet I'll become a god of" was a big factor as well. Worst seduction line ever. Ugh. *shudders*)

[Guardsman Bass]

My response? I broke up with him. (Granted, the "You can be my spirit wife and produce the souls of our bajillions of spirit children on the planet I'll become a god of" was a big factor as well. Worst seduction line ever. Ugh. *shudders*)

He actually said that? Jesus, that's scary - you don't even hear a lot of Mormons saying that in my area, which makes me wonder if they believe it themselves. At least he didn't mention that you'd only be one of multiple spirit wives; polygamy is apparently fair game in the afterlife.

[Zac Naloen]

I've recently been told that because I don't have "faith" that I will never understand religion.

I told that person to fuck off and stop being such a sanctimonious twat.

I'm sure there's a better way to handle it but I have a shirt fuse for that kind of shit.

[Mayabird]

My response? I broke up with him. (Granted, the "You can be my spirit wife and produce the souls of our bajillions of spirit children on the planet I'll become a god of" was a big factor as well. Worst seduction line ever. Ugh. *shudders*)

He actually said that? Jesus, that's scary - you don't even hear a lot of Mormons saying that in my area, which makes me wonder if they believe it themselves. At least he didn't mention that you'd only be one of multiple spirit wives; polygamy is apparently fair game in the afterlife.

He didn't, but I did. Also my objection to being nothing but a holy uterus that's constantly giving birth.

This is one of those Georgia Tech dating stories that I was mentioning earlier. I'm thinking that the only reason he mentioned it was because he was just THAT socially awkward that he didn't think to not say it, whereas the others know better than to open their mouths around "gentiles."

[Ender]

Heh, I got told that as an atheist I didn't have faith because unlike the faithful I didn't have a soul. Since I didn't have one, that's why I couldn't see that God exists, but the faithful have them and can.

Generally, when I get in the situation where someone says I don't know what I am talking about I start to just beat them down with facts about the topic they don't know.

[DPDarkPrimus]

If you don't have a soul if you don't have faith then what is the point of trying to convert people if they don't have souls to save.

[Singular Intellect]

If you don't have a soul if you don't have faith then what is the point of trying to convert people if they don't have souls to save.

*waves hand* I know this one!

[fundie]
Everyone has the seed of a soul, and through faith you water it!
[/fundie]

[Kanastrous]

You ever discussed with a person of a certain religious background and looking at it from the outside, you observe certain things about the religion.
You are then told that you know nothing about the belief systems.

Been told this by Catholics and 90% of the time they are saying the same thing I was but just tangent it.

What are good responses?

Haw about you don't have to be suffering from a disease, in order to recognize its symptoms?

[Kitsune]

That is a great one liner

[Kanastrous]

I find it's more effective for ending conversations, than continuing them.

[Lord of the Abyss]

What are good responses?

"There's nothing to understand; you made it all up."

Demand proof that there's anything there to understand in the first place, and when they start saying you should take things on faith or trust people's unsupported word that they "experience" God point out that's not evidence of anything.

[loomer]

I wrote a few short stories years ago. They got published in a small magazine. I went on their forums anonymously, saw a debate about the setting of the stories, and corrected the mistakes they were making.

They then decided to tell me I didn't know a thing about the fictional setting I created for the stories.

[JBG]

"I've recently been told that because I don't have "faith" that I will never understand religion."

When attempting to introduce the Bruce Codices etc into a discussion, about the origins of her Faith, with an intelligent, Uni educated Christian, I was boldly told that they weren't "inspired" as apparently the books in the King James Bible, for instance, were.

No amount of polite queries about logic, evidence etc would elucidate the/any meaning of "inspired".

[Darth Wong]

"I've recently been told that because I don't have "faith" that I will never understand religion."

When attempting to introduce the Bruce Codices etc into a discussion, about the origins of her Faith, with an intelligent, Uni educated Christian, I was boldly told that they weren't "inspired" as apparently the books in the King James Bible, for instance, were.

No amount of polite queries about logic, evidence etc would elucidate the/any meaning of "inspired".

"Inspired" means "God told them to write it". Of course, it's rather difficult to determine whether God told someone to do something. This whole "inspired by God" thing is really nothing more than yet another re-phrasing of "I just believe it because I believe it", better known as "Shut up, heathen scum".

[PainRack]

I wrote a few short stories years ago. They got published in a small magazine. I went on their forums anonymously, saw a debate about the setting of the stories, and corrected the mistakes they were making.

They then decided to tell me I didn't know a thing about the fictional setting I created for the stories.

Ouch.... I had that same foot in mouth syndrome before, except I was the one doing it to people like you.

Frankly, can anyone suggest a response that would allow the discussion to continue though? It just gets extremely frustrating when "If you knew so much, you would be a christian" or some other gem pops up and any adequate response, or even JUST ignoring it shuts down an interesting discussion.

[Themightytom]

Frankly, can anyone suggest a response that would allow the discussion to continue though? It just gets extremely frustrating when "If you knew so much, you would be a christian" or some other gem pops up and any adequate response, or even JUST ignoring it shuts down an interesting discussion.

While you're at it can someone post the seven words that make a person fall in love with you? there wouldn't be any magic word responses, i think it would come more from your demeanor.

I think if you want to have a discussion with someone that could potentially challenge their core beliefs you have to have be willing to develop mutual respect.

With a rational argument you don't need that. you state your case, you provide your evidence, and than let fly with the one liners.


Religion on the other hand is often tied up in personal experience. When you flame the points the other person is making, you aren't attacking "Evidence" you are attacking them, their family their friends, the experiences that they treasure etc.

[Ender]

While you're at it can someone post the seven words that make a person fall in love with you?

"I have lots and lots of money."

[Themightytom]

Crap, i've been using :"I have a gift card to Arby's"

[Stuart]

While you're at it can someone post the seven words that make a person fall in love with you? there wouldn't be any magic word responses, i think it would come more from your demeanor.

Hey, want a ride in my Corvette?

It doesn't fail.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

While you're at it can someone post the seven words that make a person fall in love with you? there wouldn't be any magic word responses, i think it would come more from your demeanor.

Hey, want a ride in my Corvette?

It doesn't fail.

Stuart, your capacity to be a Rich White Bastard in Style never fails to delight me.

[Darth Wong]

I think if you want to have a discussion with someone that could potentially challenge their core beliefs you have to have be willing to develop mutual respect.

The problem is that when you play this game, you may find that you are not allowed to challenge their core beliefs. Let's be honest here: when you say "mutual respect", you're talking about respect for the other guy's beliefs, not (for example) his work ethic.

With a rational argument you don't need that. you state your case, you provide your evidence, and than let fly with the one liners.

Religion on the other hand is often tied up in personal experience. When you flame the points the other person is making, you aren't attacking "Evidence" you are attacking them, their family their friends, the experiences that they treasure etc.

If you want to be friends with someone with whom you disagree on a major issue, it's best to simply avoid that issue. If you want to challenge it, you have to accept the possibility that he will react angrily and defensively, no matter how impersonal you try to make it. But in some cases, that's still the best approach. Even if they're stubborn and stupid SOBs, the only way for them to know how weak their arguments are is to be humiliated while trying to use them. It may not change their faith (right away), but it might take some of the wind out of their sails.

[Themightytom]

The problem is that when you play this game, you may find that you are not allowed to challenge their core beliefs.

Yes. So in other words don't go into the discussion PLANNING to challenge his core beliefs, go in trying to determine what they are and how they work. Even jsut acknowledging that someone has a process is enough for them to let you debunk it (if thats your goal)

If they have shaky core beliefs, just ASKING about them will make them nervous because you are asking things that point at shaky schemas.

if they are a super zealot it could be because they KNOW they have shaky core beliefs and would rather defend the "silly" peripheral ones to draw attention away from the weaker ones. its a common shut down to just say "You don't understand religion" because that statement refers to a broad abstraction.

Let's be honest here: when you say "mutual respect", you're talking about respect for the other guy's beliefs, not (for example) his work ethic

I was thinking more of mutual respect for status actually. As in making some internal acknowledgements to guide behaviors for the sake of conversations.

a. this person has a sense of dignity
b. this person has beliefs that are derviced and supported by something in their experience.
c. this person is an individual and I won't apply the behaviors and arguments of others to what he is saying and doing.

And actually I would probably consider a "Worth ethic" indicative of a core spiritual belief. that would be a good lead in.
"You know one thing i really respect about you is your worth ethic. You work hard you are punctual, you are very meticulous. A lot of people don't seem to think those things matter.

And if you drop the silence bomb they will try to fill it either with "Well thanks I'm pretty awesome" Which gives indications that they can't take a compliment OR they might start talking about why its important to them to be that, OR they could start bad mouthing other people who do not have those traits. this gives you an idea of whether they are defensive, receptive or judgemental respectively.

If you want to be friends with someone with whom you disagree on a major issue, it's best to simply avoid that issue. If you want to challenge it, you have to accept the possibility that he will react angrily and defensively, no matter how impersonal you try to make it.

it could even get MORE personal depending how close you are to that person. They may have tied experiences with you into the belief system you accidently undermine. People care more what their close friends and family say about them than strangers.