Is it right to confront the religious with their mythology?

[Guest]

I'm quitting the security business soon, for a risky endeavor with far less security: writing.

SO, I've become a bit more confrontational, a bit more adversarial, towards those coworkers with whom I've had religious/ethics discussions. Don't have to maintain a good working relationship any more...

Today, I was mentioning the Passover to a deeply religious woman, and pointed out that god used his holy miraculous powers to send an angel to commit infanticide.

I said, "Now, according to your mythology..." That got a finger up and wagging in my face immediately. "Don't call my religion mythology!"

"Well, why on earth not?" was my dunderheaded reply, and it was off to the races...

My question is this: is it right (insert your definition of 'right' here) to point out what you see as the failings or inconsistencies of a religion in a discussion with a person who holds that faith? We all know deeply religious people who will not be moved, who will spout self-contradictory idiocy in defense of what their holy book says.

I do get angry sometimes. Not 'Dark Cobra' angry, but frustrated because the conversations usually go nowhere with such people. They like to think they're participating in a useful theological discussion, but the mind is just... too... closed...

And as an atheist, my mind is nearly shut to the possibility of god(s) existing. But I feel I must spread my beliefs, because I feel they're correct... I'm struck by the similarities between belief sytems...

anyway, when you know that you're probably simply making the other person uncomfortable by throwing what you feel to be the cold hard facts at them, is it right?

 

[Shroud of Akron]

it seems to me that it would be okay if you are stating facts. your belief is a different story, don't throw your belief in someone's face, just facts. if someone can't handle facts and get angry at you for stating them, f*ck 'em, they deserve to pissed off.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

I'm quitting the security business soon, for a risky endeavor with far less security: writing.

SO, I've become a bit more confrontational, a bit more adversarial, towards those coworkers with whom I've had religious/ethics discussions. Don't have to maintain a good working relationship any more...

Today, I was mentioning the Passover to a deeply religious woman, and pointed out that god used his holy miraculous powers to send an angel to commit infanticide.

I said, "Now, according to your mythology..." That got a finger up and wagging in my face immediately. "Don't call my religion mythology!"

"Well, why on earth not?" was my dunderheaded reply, and it was off to the races...

My question is this: is it right (insert your definition of 'right' here) to point out what you see as the failings or inconsistencies of a religion in a discussion with a person who holds that faith? We all know deeply religious people who will not be moved, who will spout self-contradictory idiocy in defense of what their holy book says.

I do get angry sometimes. Not 'Dark Cobra' angry, but frustrated because the conversations usually go nowhere with such people. They like to think they're participating in a useful theological discussion, but the mind is just... too... closed...

And as an atheist, my mind is nearly shut to the possibility of god(s) existing. But I feel I must spread my beliefs, because I feel they're correct... I'm struck by the similarities between belief sytems...

anyway, when you know that you're probably simply making the other person uncomfortable by throwing what you feel to be the cold hard facts at them, is it right?

Society is quick to promote religion. To contribute to a hideous mental disease.

Religion (and irrationality!) are very much like computer viruses.

Jerry Falwell is like the "Cherenyoble"(sp?) virus, while some passive, more liberal people with religions are just like the virii that take up hard drive space.

Their minds are closed because faith is seen as a good thing, that it's "ok" to be infected, that it is part of your identity.

 

[shemp]

You might as well walk up to people in the street and call them a f*cking idiot to their face. It's approximately the same.

Good luck with your writing. I'll let the grass grow long, and when you're starving you can come up here and graze.

 

[LCBOY]

Being a Chrisitan, I guess I qualify as one of Lost Sailor's "deeply religious people who will not be moved". But I promise I will NOT "spout self-contradictory idoicy in defense of what my holy book says".

As a former atheist, though, I was intrigued by you comments:

And as an atheist, my mind is nearly shut to the possibility of god(s) existing. But I feel I must spread my beliefs, because I feel they're correct... I'm struck by the similarities between belief sytems...
Have you always felt this way?

 

[evildave]

I dunno. Seems to me that it's just a bit pointless.

An accurate comparison might be provoking someone whom you regularly see wandering down the highway having animated arguments with himself.

Can you really believe you can make such a person see "sense"?

Besides, a conversation requires two way communication. As described, conversation is impossible.

Your mind is closed to all things religious.

Their mind is closed to all things NOT of their personal religion.

Not a lot of communication will occur in this situation. It can only be an exercise in mutual frustration.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

But I promise I will NOT "spout self-contradictory idoicy in defense of what my holy book says".

Why not? It's the only possible way for you to defend your irrational, unfounded beliefs.

 

[neutrino_cannon]

As a former atheist, though, I was intrigued by you comments:

Much though I hate to hijack this thread,... wait, I'll start a new one, because now you've got me interested.

 

[Knightmare6]

I like to confront the religious with their own mythology, but you can only do so much to those who wish to remain blind by choice.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

I like to confront the religious with their own mythology, but you can only do so much to those who wish to remain blind by choice.

We need more people to counteract those crap feel-good "you need something to believe in" commercials.

 

[Knightmare6]

We need more people to counteract those crap feel-good "you need something to believe in" commercials.

Agreed, I'd rather feel better about myself, and at the accomplishments my own perseverance enabled me to conquer. I'm all for spiritual fulfillment, but not through the idolization of some entity forced down my throat by organizations that have probably caused more wars and death than power-mongering warlords.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

Agreed, I'd rather feel better about myself, and at the accomplishments my own perseverance enabled me to conquer. I'm all for spiritual fulfillment, but not through the idolization of some entity forced down my throat by organizations that have probably caused more wars and death than power-mongering warlords.

Spiritual fulfillment? How can you fulfill something that doesn't exist (at least no evidence indicates there is such)?

Unless you're talking about alcoholic beverages...

 

[Knightmare6]

Spiritual fulfillment? How can you fulfill something that doesn't exist (at least no evidence indicates there is such)?

Unless you're talking about alcoholic beverages...

By spiritual fulfillment I mean the feeling of my own life having a purpose beyond the life-and-death cycle, the furthering of my lineage, keeping myself happy, and trying to leave a legacy with which I can be remembered upon my passing after death by others.

Egotistical... yeah.

 

[fishbob]

EP er LS sez:

My question is this: is it right (insert your definition of 'right' here) to point out what you see as the failings or inconsistencies of a religion in a discussion with a person who holds that faith? We all know deeply religious people who will not be moved, who will spout self-contradictory idiocy in defense of what their holy book says.

Sure you can point out the inconsistencies of a religion to a deeply religious person. The problem is that you don't have the time to do a thorough job of it.

Like trying to teach a pig to sing - not much chance of success and it sure annoys the pig.

I have tried this (the religious discussions, not the pig training) once or twice. The discussions didn't really conclude, we just got tired and quit.

 

[Samus]

Religious beliefs (even if those beliefs are "none") are something that a person has to come to accept by themself. Listening to someone else yammer on rarely works, as those beliefs are very deeply rooted (even if those beliefs are "none").

Hence, giving a "persuasive speech to convince" isn't going to get you anywhere with the majority of people. In other words, you're not going to convince a/an [a]theist to think otherwise in a three minute argument at the office.

Instead, the focus should be on spreading information. Don't try to tell people to be atheists, try to inform people on the problems with any given dogmatic religion, or with being a theist in general. Point out whatever "evidence" you see that disproves the existence of God. Then, let people decide for themselves whether you have a good point or that you're full of it.

Your overarching motivation seems to be to convince other people that they're wrong. Of course you're inviting conflict. People don't like to be told they are wrong, and will often become very defensive if they think you're attacking them personally (see threads with Dark Cobra and I replying to each other).

I stopped trying to convince people to change their beliefs. If the topic comes up, I will give the conclusions that I've reached and why I have reached those conclusions. Never do I try to convince others they are wrong, unless of course, they try to do that to me.

Your mileage may vary, but I've found arguing with the ultra-religious to be pointless.

 

[sorgoth]

actually

^This board turned me into an atheist. And for that I was thankful.

Actually, right before finding this place, I was entering the Logical phase , and things needed to make SENSE. So many good arguments against religion...just didn't make sense to me anymore.


Back on topic... No, I don't think it's wrong. I mean, sometimes people just don't have the right information to make a decision.

 

[Mercutio]

I only argue if they try to convert me first. Then I look them in they eye and tell them I used to be a born-again christian, now I'm an atheist, and if they really want to go there, I guarantee I'll convert them before they convert me. So far, that's all it has taken. I guess that means I don't actually argue, but I do get a point across.

 

[Ladewig]

My question is this: is it right (insert your definition of 'right' here) to point out what you see as the failings or inconsistencies of a religion in a discussion with a person who holds that faith?

Depends on what your goal is. If you are trying to sell blood pressure medication, then leading off with calling someone's religion a mythology is a perfect starting point (especially if you are doing so on a high holy day). If you goal is to understand the other person's position and beliefs, then using emotionally-neutral language to ask specific questions about the failings or inconsistencies might be a better approach.

Because good writers always consider for whom they are writing, understanding the person's views on fundamentalism and literal interpretations might help you tailor your approach. My advice is to walk away from literalists.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

By spiritual fulfillment I mean the feeling of my own life having a purpose beyond the life-and-death cycle, the furthering of my lineage, keeping myself happy, and trying to leave a legacy with which I can be remembered upon my passing after death by others.

Egotistical... yeah.

But the feeling of fulfilling something impossible (life after death) is placed their by the religions themselves.

 

[LCBOY]

Why not? It's the only possible way for you to defend your irrational, unfounded beliefs.

I joined this board to learn how other people think and what they believe in and why. I have a sense that no matter what I say, it's not going to move you at all. So I am not even going to try. But, that's ok, this board is about exchange of ideas, right?