Watchtower explains why it's NOT a Cult

by JWOP 49 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Ucantnome

  And, again, they are not exercising control over anyone's life who hasn't agreed to cede to them.

  Sulla, for born ins i think the situation is slightly different.
• 

  AwSnap

  marking for later
• 

  undercover

  I find debating with JWs whether or not they are a cult tends to devolve into a pointless argument on semantics that lets the JW distract from what should be the main point i.e. that the Society try to exercise far too much control over individual JWs lives.

  Good point.

  Outside of this board, or converastions with fellow apostate, ex-members, I never use the word "cult" in describing JWs. Not even to the uninitiated. The average person hears the word "cult" and they think Jim Jones and the People's Temple or David Koresh and the Branch Davidians at Waco, or Heaven's Gate out of California. No, the JWs do not fit into the images that the word now conjours up in most people.

  It's best to stick with the facts about JWs, that the average person would find appalling and despicable. The ritual shunning of ex-members. The refusal of blood transfusions that result in the loss of life...especially children. The doomsday message of "the end" where only they will survive and 99.9 of the world's population will die.
• 

  cedars

  undercover - I agree to an extent, but I think that what you're saying clouds the issue. You're saying that we shouldn't say whether JWs are a cult or not to the "uninitiated" because of the negative connotations of the word. However, whether the word has negative connotations or not is irrelevant. Either JWs are a cult, or they aren't. This video demonstrates that by the JWs OWN definition of a cult, they can be described by this word.

  I would agree that the word "cult" conjures extreme images of Wako etc, and people losing their lives to cult leaders - but JWs have lost their lives because of their leaders too. Think of the many thousands who have died due to the blood doctrine. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for reasoning with JWs in a way that they can understand and relate to, and that won't scare them away. However, this isn't what this thread is about. JWs are a cult - whether you choose to tell them so is another matter entirely.

  Cedars
• 

  jgnat

  The witnesses I believe do use a tried and true indoctrination technique. Conversion to baptism is never done in less than six months, and involves weekly "study" for an extended period. During this time, questions are deferred, promising to cover later in the material. Later, of course, never comes. The candidate is conditioned to tolerate unanswered questions.

  Then there is the admonition to separate themselves from friends and family within day two of the study, that concerned family members may be unwitting accomplices for Satan. I've seen this type of warning in all sorts of indoctrination-type literature, and for me is an instant red flag.
• 

  undercover

  cedars - I agree that JWs are a cult, and on a thread like this, calling them a cult is representative of what they are and how they act. I have no issues with the word when talking with fellow ex-dubs/apostates. We get it. We know.

  My comment, however, was in agreement to the bolded statment (I forgot who said it) above my comment. Arguing over the semantics of the word, when debating JWs or even outsiders, detracts from the real issue...that the WTS is dangerous to a degree.

  More than once, I've described WTS actions to outsiders (non, never have been-JWs) and I've actually had them use the word, as in, "That's fucked up. Sounds more than a little cult like if you ask me". I like for them to come to the conclusion based on facts presented, and not because I loaded the language with buzzwords. But that's just me. Results may vary based on application.
• 

  cedars

  Thanks for explaining undercover, I think I understand you more clearly. If you can see things the way they are, then you're not inclined to "argue over semantics" when it comes to defining JWs as a cult. However, for indoctrinated JWs it's a bit different.

  I also agree that you need to be careful when describing JWs as a cult to those who are still indoctrinated. However, as you agree, this doesn't detract from the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses ARE a cult by their own definition, which is all this very amusing video was endeavoring to point out. I actually think that, in the case of this video, humour is an excellent way of "breaking the ice" on the subject.

  I also personally think that, even without the video, describing JWs as a cult to family members might just "shock" them into questioning themselves as to why this description is accurate or inaccurate. Maybe someone like Steve Hassan would be a good person to ask as to whether such bold techniques are effective or not! Certainly Sulla takes exception to the word for some reason, but all the elements are there if you choose to see them.

  Cedars
• 

  undercover

  describing JWs as a cult to family members might just "shock" them into questioning themselves as to why this description is accurate or inaccurate.

  My guess would be that results would differ based on the person you were talking to.

  Using some of my own family as a guidepost, I know that any mention of the word would cause them to sound general quarters and raise defense shields against attack. They're already wary of me and my criticism of JW/WTS. Throwing that word around them would only piss em off and warn them to avoid me for the moment.

  However, if someone were already receptive to information critical to the WTS, then the word just might shake them up a bit...make em wonder, "am I in a cult afterall?" One family member finally came around and I've used the word with them and they agree.
• 

  cedars

  undercover - yes, everyone's different and will react differently. Certainly jwFairyTale's videos aren't for everyone - however I think humour is an excellent ice breaker. I love how he goes overboard saying "Noooooo!" at the beginning in response to the suggestion that it could be a cult. Whilst many JWs would "raise shields" at the first sight of his videos, I'm sure there are others who are more thick-skinned and who possibly have doubts already, and see EXACTLY what he's getting at. Certainly there's no "one size fits all" solution when it comes to countering indoctrination, so perhaps it's just as well that we have all these various means (including humour) at our disposal depending on the person we're trying to reason with.

  Cedars
• 

  Chariklo

  Bookmarking.

  It's not only very funny, but has some hints within it as to how to counteract the Witnesses' special technique of making inoctrination seem like "reasoning".

  Excellent!

  jgnat

  Then there is the admonition to separate themselves from friends and family within day two of the study, that concerned family members may be unwitting accomplices for Satan. I've seen this type of warning in all sorts of indoctrination-type literature, and for me is an instant red flag.

  Absolutely I can vouch for that. The victim....for they are victims, as I was...is praised for every time they insist on listening to JW's and ignoring their family. In my case my family appeared angry to me because right from the start the JW's were manipulating me, the worst one being the sister who eventually became my study conductor, but whoe behaviour eventually brought about my departure.

  My poor family, as I now know, were distraught at what was happening to me, whereas the Witnesses were constantly praising me for standing up to them.

  Where was my brain? My own common sense? The only conclusion I can come to is that there is a sort of hypnosis going on.