by Check_Your_Premises 10 Replies latest watchtower bible
Here is the link
Scripture Twisting: Twenty Ways the Cults Misread the Bible
I was hoping to find some good info on how different bible based cults use the exact same verses in the exact same ways to instill fear in the members. Topics of particular interest would be how various cults use the bible to justify excommunication, unity(unanimity), and justificaiton for why there is, and they are the "one true" religion.
Regards
CYP
I know the Jehovah's Witness tactic begins with deconstructionism.
Like a series of parlor tricks, JW's dismantle a simple belief based on scriptures. They reassemble the sequence of linked logical "causes" and "effects" to produce their own version of how things are. If they run into difficulty; they resort to the "bad translation" fallback position.
So, it isn't so much the scriptures themselves as the cut and paste chain of logic which sets the JW beliefs off from the pack.
Take the Trinity as an example.
A standard proof text, John 10:30, (I'm going from memory, folks) "My Father and I are one"; would not be allowed to say anything by itself. No. Instead it would be set off against another scriptural context altogether and inserted and assert as being identical in setting and context.
They would go to Jesus' prayer where he says he and his father are one just as his disciples and he are one. (Coverting singularity of number and identity into singularity of purpose and agreement.)
This grafting process is counter to all hermenutics principles and is intellectually dishonest.
As politicians well know; if you don't like where a question is going to lead, you must REFRAME the question and answer it (the reframed question) instead of the actual question.
Terry
Another misguided attempt to defend orthodox Christianity from the groups that interpret the Bible differently. The author appears to be using the word "cult" to mean anyone who denies the Trinity. How unfortunate. The real issues lay in control methods and ethics not interpretation and doctrine. The tired old logic that if someone spins the Bible a way we are unaccustomed to they must be guilty of "twisting" and disregarding context. Those who use such arguments to condemn others beliefs really have no real knowledge of the Bible and it's history. There are plenty of high control "cult" Christian groups that teach the Trinity, possibly the author is even a member of one.
Good idea. It's ok to criticize other cults for their cultish ways, and they'll see the similarities on their own.
You could start with a really good free program "E-Sword" And download all the free Bibles. Lockman foundation will charge for their Bibles. And compare with the parallel feature.
A lot of the books about how "cults" twist the Bible are written by extremely biased Evangelicals who are as apt to cry "heresy" as a JW is to cry "apostate."
Biblical exegesis is a very complex subject with about as many different opinions as there are denominations.
B.
Logan and Pete,
So you guys read this book?
CYP
Check....,
I have read this book, and Logansrun and Pete are correct in their hunch. Here is a quote from the book :
"As Christians and, we trust, good readers of the Bible, we need all the help we can get to be sure we are reading the Scripture accurately, that we are indeed worshiping the one true God. That's why I wrote this book: to help all of us - myself as much as anyone - to become better readers of the Scriptures, more devoted followers of our Lord Jesus Christ, more effective communicators of God;s truth to all people. But the book also seeks a special audience - those being led, as many today, by false teachers into false doctrines and perhaps eventually into eternal darkness. May God use this book to help stem the tide of error"
The contents of the book follow in similar vein. Imho just another religionist who starts his research with a conclusion, and whose agenda hangs out all over the place.
Best regards - HS
Hillary,
Are the arguments made fair, valid? Just because someone is arguing a point with an agenda, doesn't make their arguments invalid. (ie a court of law)
Nevertheless it is good to know if the author is arguing with an agenda, because it does help in judging his credibility.
Thanks Hil!
MDP
Check....,
Well, it depends what you mean by 'fair'. For example, chapter five deals with the following :
Ignoring the immediate context. Collapsing Contexts. Overspecification.Word Play. The Figurative Fallacy. Speculative readings of Predictive Prophecy.
All these headings are well, and it has to be said very ably illustrated, but the problem that the writer does not grapple with is how his own viewpoint on these scriptures is not itself 'twisting' scripture. So what happens is that the writer follows the suspect modus operandi of many such 'exposers of falsehood', he merely replaces one set viewpoint with another. So the work cannot be said to be reasoned and scholarly work as it is not so much written to inform the soul as to save it!
A good start with trying to untangle the process of cultic thinking is Dr. Christopher Evans 'Cults Of Unreason'. It is a scholarly and non-partisan view of the issue.
Best regards - HS
