Does inexperience disqualify your voice/thoughts?

[jamie26301]

Paul told Timathy not to let the older believers dispise his youth. Paul was referencing Timothy's teaching, and by this implying it is possible to be young and yet more mature in Christ than older believers.

So with gifts of the Spirit, for instance, some may say those who haven't experienced it first hand have no reliable word to dispute it. I agree, but only to a point. Paul was taking about marriage, food, and things like this of Timothy's teaching, but can these things also be wielded as "don't judge unless you've struggled with overeating like I do" for example. You can use "don't judge unless you've been there" as a defense for any sin, or overindulgence of good things, that you like. (Yes, I think it is possible to be too religious or zealous)

And earlier elsewhere online, I was arguing against stereotyping, and the stereotype in question was crooked lawyers. They are "all the same" apparently, and my objection to that assertion was met with lack of interaction with lawyers.

No, haven't been around lawyers that much, (though I HAVE interacted with a few) but if Jesus can put aside the stigma of crooked, greedy, agenda driven tax collectors, I'm not sure what exempts me from extending the same benefit of a doubt. I'm not sure why we would need discernment, if all you had to do was read the person's business card. But I digress.

So, the question I have is do you think inexperience, lack of traditional study, lack of exposure to the topic in question means what you say is automatically disqualified, subpar or suspicious? Why or why not and what would you examples be to support your sentiment?

 

[Bowhunter2394]

What does David tell us under the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

*I have more understanding than all my Teachers: for thy Testimonies are my Meditation.

*I understand more than the Ancients, because I Keep thy Precepts.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even Christ Himself Taught in the Temple as a young boy.....

youthful Experience does not disqualify- neither does AGED experience in Churchianity QUALIFY you to LORD a 'certain gospel ' over somebody..

if its Led of the Spirit, He will be by your side as the 'ancients' , those hardened in religion. pursue and persecute you because you are led of the Spirit and you follow the thing that Good is....

 

[zaoman32]

Typically if someone does not have experience I tend to disregard their opinion, unless it is someone I know very well and respect. Typically those people keep silent on issues they know little about unless God pushes them to say something.

There's a difference between learning about something and actually experiencing it. Working in a factory I work beneath people who have never actually done any shop work, but they have degrees in whatever respective field they need. When they try implementing new systems they typically work in theory, but not actuality. They typically come up with better ideas talking to people with experience and slightly tweaking them with their own knowledge.

 

[jamie26301]

Typically if someone does not have experience I tend to disregard their opinion, unless it is someone I know very well and respect. Typically those people keep silent on issues they know little about unless God pushes them to say something.

Perhaps. Some people learn by talking, and most people talk by throwing in their thoughts, however naive they may be, and that propells the discussion... And how one with open ears learn. It's a common practice in colleges for students who know little to nothing about the topic at hand voicing their initial thoughts - and stacking that against what they learn. And honestly, that's good for growning minds, I think. Science operates on asking questions about something that there may be little information to begin with.

There's a difference between learning about something and actually experiencing it.

Sure. What I'm driving at is how reasonable/insightful ideas people don' t like are ignored, shot down, and the justification is lack of experience. Stating one lacks experience AND THEN explaining why their understanding is short, that's different. But that doesn't always happen.

Jesus was a target of such an attack because He "never studied letters." "How dare He critique our sect if He wasn't trained in it?"

God can open one's understanding without experience. Not that it happens often, but King Solomon would be an example of that.

Working in a factory I work beneath people who have never actually done any shop work, but they have degrees in whatever respective field they need. When they try implementing new systems they typically work in theory, but not actuality. They typically come up with better ideas talking to people with experience and slightly tweaking them with their own knowledge.

Well, I say there's a lot of truth to that. Here in the States, fast food chains and other stores don't run as smoothly as they could if the managers had any decision power in employeement - but they don't. The coperate are not in the store often enough to see the method and level of productivity - all they see are numbers.

However, I also think that the models those above come up with would usually work assuming they have the ideal crew. Where I worked had policies concerning giving out food in drivethrough - very, very simple and if followed the error margin causing customers to get the wrong car's order would drop dramatically.... but the employees know better and the managers don't follow it. What does the distict manager know about any of this, anyway? (yet the late district manager as well as the owner of that company started off as low level employees) They rely on memory, and lining up receipts (which could and frequently got misplaced in a rush) rather the the screen, make it harder and increasing mistakes - because they don't want to get "yelled at" for not keeping time, yet they still go over time, so I'm not sure what the difference is.

And I've been on front line enough to know that if everyone cared, paid attention, and did their part, it would run very smoothly. The company I worked for had a good store policy... But they wouldn't follow it. I don't say that for every company, but the store I worked at brought some woes upon themselves.

 

[Siberian_Khatru]

Does inexperience disqualify your voice/thoughts?

No, but it can make for a more shallow opinion. Sometimes, however, experience results in a sort of argumentum ad populum mindset, in which a conjecture devoid of experience might actually offer a helpful perspective.

 

[zaoman32]

Perhaps. Some people learn by talking, and most people talk by throwing in their thoughts, however naive they may be, and that propells the discussion... And how one with open ears learn. It's a common practice in colleges for students who know little to nothing about the topic at hand voicing their initial thoughts - and stacking that against what they learn. And honestly, that's good for growning minds, I think. Science operates on asking questions about something that there may be little information to begin with.


Sure. What I'm driving at is how reasonable/insightful ideas people don' t like are ignored, shot down, and the justification is lack of experience. Stating one lacks experience AND THEN explaining why their understanding is short, that's different. But that doesn't always happen.

Jesus was a target of such an attack because He "never studied letters." "How dare He critique our sect if He wasn't trained in it?"

God can open one's understanding without experience. Not that it happens often, but King Solomon would be an example of that.


Well, I say there's a lot of truth to that. Here in the States, fast food chains and other stores don't run as smoothly as they could if the managers had any decision power in employeement - but they don't. The coperate are not in the store often enough to see the method and level of productivity - all they see are numbers.

However, I also think that the models those above come up with would usually work assuming they have the ideal crew. Where I worked had policies concerning giving out food in drivethrough - very, very simple and if followed the error margin causing customers to get the wrong car's order would drop dramatically.... but the employees know better and the managers don't follow it. What does the distict manager know about any of this, anyway? (yet the late district manager as well as the owner of that company started off as low level employees) They rely on memory, and lining up receipts (which could and frequently got misplaced in a rush) rather the the screen, make it harder and increasing mistakes - because they don't want to get "yelled at" for not keeping time, yet they still go over time, so I'm not sure what the difference is.

And I've been on front line enough to know that if everyone cared, paid attention, and did their part, it would run very smoothly. The company I worked for had a good store policy... But they wouldn't follow it. I don't say that for every company, but the store I worked at brought some woes upon themselves.

Using Jesus as an example for lack of experience is a poor choice. He was God and knew and understood far more than the pharisees thought. The creator knows the creation.

I've had people give me advice in situations they had no experience in, and it wasn't until I got burnt following their advice that I realized it was bad advice. I've witnessed numerous threads on here where people admitted not knowing much about a situation but still spouting off bad advice, that I knew for a fact was bad advice because I had experienced it more than once. Usually things a long the lines of addiction, divorce, and being spiritually stagnant. Any amount of bad advice can be a debilitating matter, and advice should not be given by someone who has had no experience with it.

 

[ArtsieSteph]

I think it can depend on the situation. Coming to a situation with fresh eyes can really help those who are jaded by years of abuse/negative responses by certain groups. Take kids, they often have a very limited exposure to things, yet even intuitive observations can be spot on.

i mean we're supposed to be babes in Christ right? Innocent faith wise? Wouldn't this apply?