Agreed that, Designs.
The Watchtower, Christianity and Cultism
by Nickolas 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Hoffnung
Everything depends on your definition of a cult. Steven Hassan's books make this definition easier by adding the "mind-control" to it. I have just received his 2 books this week and I can recommend it to everybody. I learned many new things. As a JW, I can positively identify plenty of techniques used by the Watchtower Society which make it with great certainty a mind-control cult, even if they are not as agressive in their use as the moonies. I do not believe the catholic church could be called a mind-control cult in general. Maybe some factions or monastries are. But then again, I never was a Catholic. As a catholic, you can walk out any moment without repercussions on your emotional balance. You do not have to believe Armaggeddon is round the corner etc... It has not always been that way though, one has to admit. In some dark middle ages, mind control techniques were very visible amongs catholics.
As far as Jesus goes, whatever we find about him in the bible does not indicate the use of one of the mind-control techniques, so in my opinion, christianity in general is not a cult.
I think Godrulz would do good for himself and others on this board to read Steven Hassan's Combatting Cult Mind Control and explain us in which points his religion is using mind control techniques or not. I hope he BITEs in this challenge
Hoffnung
-
Nickolas
As per option#3, atheisim can be a cult as can someones excessive admiration for Dawkins ;)
Glad you put that winking smilie at the end of that sentence, Paul. In many ways I agree with you. Those who embrace atheism because they are told to or because they were brought up to be atheists and otherwise because they haven't thought things through are no better than theists who are theists for the same reasons. One might think, for example, of the Red Army hoard of the second world war, many if not most of whom were brutish, ignorant, violent men who escewed the notion of god because the state required it of them. Theirs was as much a cult as was Jim Jones'. However, theirs was a cult of politics and personality, not of science. As to Richard Dawkins, I have enormous respect for the man but I draw the line at admiration. I don't admire him at all. He seems to be a bit of an apologist for pedophilia, for example, saying almost that "it aint so bad as people make it out to be". On that score, I very much disagree with him.
As far as Jesus goes, whatever we find about him in the bible does not indicate the use of one of the mind-control techniques, so in my opinion, christianity in general is not a cult.
I was raised Roman Catholic, Hoffnung. It was my Irish mother's upbringing and my atheist father deferred to her (or, more likely, her firey Irish temperment. Filling my head with theist nonsense was not to him a hill to die for). The church did, indeed, exercise mind control. If you have never heard of "Catholic guilt complex" you might want to look it up. It is very real, and even in my aged, enlightened state, I am still affected by it. As to Jesus and his first century followers, a recent conversation I had in here with a couple of very bright and affable Christians about how the genealogies of Christ as reported by Matthew and Luke legitimise the questionable accounts of Genesis brought to light (to me, at least) something that indicates that they, too, sought to control how their adherents thought. Reference was made to Paul's admonition to Timothy:
1Timothy 1:3-4 "...Stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work - which is by faith."
which to me is saying, "yeah, those genealogies fall into the same categories as false doctrines and myths, but don't get bogged down in the details. Put on the blinders, check your brain at the door, and just accept all this on the basis of faith."
-
Hoffnung
Point taken Nickolas. I never was a Catholic, and I guess my impressions as an outsider were incorrect.
-
godrulz
Designs: God is Almighty and chooses to be in control without being all controlling. If you want Him to exercise His power all of the time and micro vs macromanage, you will be reduced to a robot and love, freedom, relationship, responsibility will be negated. God created the universe and will ultimately triumph over evil. Making significant others, free moral agents capable of great good and reciprocal love relationships also risks them doing great evil, rebelling, etc. Funny how you are a finite godplayer who thinks he knows better than God Himself.
AK-Jeff: heresy is half truth; a drop of poison in pure water can be fatal; JW/Mormon are not wrong about everything, but they deny the core, essential, salvific truths of biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity. They have a false god and gospel. If the Bible is not objective divine revelation, I could not say that (except with extreme groups like Jones/Koresh that even atheists would consider false religion). The Church has preserved truth for centuries. When a new group starts around the interpretation of one uneducated man, red lights should flash. Stick to your day job. Your arguments are weak.
-
PSacramento
I was raised Roman Catholic, Hoffnung. It was my Irish mother's upbringing and my atheist father deferred to her (or, more likely, her firey Irish temperment. Filling my head with theist nonsense was not to him a hill to die for). The church did, indeed, exercise mind control. If you have never heard of "Catholic guilt complex" you might want to look it up. It is very real, and even in my aged, enlightened state, I am still affected by it. As to Jesus and his first century followers, a recent conversation I had in here with a couple of very bright and affable Christians about how the genealogies of Christ as reported by Matthew and Luke legitimise the questionable accounts of Genesis brought to light (to me, at least) something that indicates that they, too, sought to control how their adherents thought. Reference was made to Paul's admonition to Timothy:
Fpor every zealous Catholic there was a "lax" catholic and the fact thet BOTH as accepted in the RCC on equal footing goes to show that it is not a cult, not really as we view cults.
Neither is the anglican or lutheran church.
That said, organized religion has and always will have certain cultish tendancies, I don't see any way around it once a religion becomes "organized".
-
Nickolas
I might then submit, Paul, that there are degrees of cultism. It goes to the question whether or not anything that is organised (in this case, any formal religion) that exhibits at least some of the defining characterists of cultism are cults. Any belief system, that has as its foundation exclusivity of truth and holds that simply to believe otherwise is to be excluded from spiritual reward, seeks to exercise control over the thoughts of its adherents, and to me that spells cult.
-
AK - Jeff
JW/Mormon are not wrong about everything, but they deny the core, essential, salvific truths of biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity.
Just opinion! Based on your personal interpretation of 'truths'.
They have a false god and gospel.
Just opinion! Based on your personal interpretation of 'truths'.
If the Bible is not objective divine revelation, I could not say that (except with extreme groups like Jones/Koresh that even atheists would consider false religion). The Church has preserved truth for centuries.
Just opinion! Based on your personal interpretation of 'truths'.
When a new group starts around the interpretation of one uneducated man, red lights should flash.
Just opinion! Based on your personal interpretation of 'truths'.
Stick to your day job. Your arguments are weak.
Same to you. In fact, substitution of opinion for fact is worse than weak. It is emptyheaded. But then, there is little doubt of that as I see your postings here often. You submit to a common religious error, of 'I have the truth, and you can't convince me, because I have the truth' circularity. You cannot define 'truth', for it is indefinable from a religious standpoint. Otherwise all you Christian sorts would believe the same shit, and you obviously don't.
God, it is trying to deal with such idiots.
Jeff
-
PSacramento
I might then submit, Paul, that there are degrees of cultism. It goes to the question whether or not anything that is organised (in this case, any formal religion) that exhibits at least some of the defining characterists of cultism are cults. Any belief system, that has as its foundation exclusivity of truth and holds that simply to believe otherwise is to be excluded from spiritual reward, seeks to exercise control over the thoughts of its adherents, and to me that spells cult.
I would agree that ANY group that seeks to exercise control over the thoughts of people is a cult, yes.
-
Nickolas
I've read your post, AK-Jeff, and can only guess that you are responding to posts made by godsrulz. I've stopped reading them, myself. They just have the effect of increasing my blood pressure (your's too, by the looks of things) and I want to look after my health, so what else can I do?
I would agree that ANY group that seeks to exercise control over the thoughts of people is a cult, yes.
That could include political groups, I assume. Stalin's regime is very good example. Hitler's, too. And Pot and all those others. Even your government and mine (actually, they're the same one) seek to have a major influence on our thinking. It's the way it is, one of the tools to maintain law and order in an otherwise free society. So, if not to be under the influence of cultism is to be truly free to think as you wish and not as others wish you to think, where does it begin and end? It really comes down to some sort of line in the sand. The line maybe as simple as doing no harm to anyone.