My previous post got me thinking of similarities of narcissism and the God complex…the following are a couple of excerpts from online – I thought Grease Spotters might enjoy reading:
A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of their error or failure, even in the face of irrefutable evidence, intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks. The person is also highly dogmatic in their views, meaning the person speaks of their personal opinions as though they were unquestionably correct.[1] Someone with a god complex may exhibit no regard for the conventions and demands of society, and may request special consideration or privileges.[
To have a god complex essentially means someone is so fervently self-assured that they actually overestimate themselves, their abilities, and their entitlement. According to licensed clinical social worker De-Andrea Blaylock-Johnson, LCSW, the inflated sense of self is the biggest indicator.
That inflated sense of self, she notes, also translates into a lot of other characteristics, especially feeling better than everyone else. "They feel they're the smartest person in the room, they know best, and their reality is the reality—their experience is the experience," she says.
Ultimately, these people tend to take arrogance to the extreme, believing they can do whatever they want with little to no regard for others—and that they're justified in doing so. "It's referred to as a 'god complex' because it's this idea that 'I am the end-all-be-all,' and they don't even consider how their actions can impact others," Blaylock-Johnson adds.
Are people with god complexes also narcissists?
If you're thinking that god complexes sound a lot like narcissism, you wouldn't be far off. They're very similar, though not totally the same. "Often when people describe a god complex, they are referring to someone who may have traits of narcissistic personality disorder," Blaylock-Johnson explains, though they may not have an actual diagnosis.
Having a god complex isn't a diagnosable condition (that is, it's not a condition listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, aka the DSM-5), but narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is. Someone diagnosed with NPD is almost certainly going to exhibit some signs of a god complex, but someone with a god complex doesn't necessarily have NPD.
There's a lot of overlap, though, particularly with grandiose narcissism. Psychologist Perpetua Neo, DClinPsy, describes this as a particular type of narcissism, when "someone's narcissistic qualities—entitlement, braggadocio, and self-obsession—are openly displayed, often at the expense of others." This is very similar to a god complex.
As Blaylock-Johnson adds, however, "It's helpful to look at the different characteristics or traits people may be exhibiting to help you figure out how to handle the situation—but also you don't want to necessarily throw around diagnoses."
11 common signs to look out for:
An inflated sense of self: The biggest sign of a god complex is an inflated sense of self and general feelings of grandiosity. As Blaylock-Johnson describes it, "They think they're a lot more important than they really are."
Gaslighting: Because people with a god complex are self-absorbed, it can be difficult for them to recognize or accept another person's experience. This, Blaylock-Johnson says, can lead to gaslighting, a form of manipulation that involves denying someone else's reality. Gaslighting is also common among narcissists.
Lack of empathy: A general lack of empathy is common for those with god complexes, Blaylock-Johnson says. "They have an inability to see the humanity in others."
Inconsiderate behavior: Because of their tendency for self-absorption and lack of empathy, people with god complexes often behave in inconsiderate ways. According to Blaylock-Johnson, they don't think about how they're affecting others. In their own eyes, they can do no wrong.
Validation seeking: There's an excessive need for external admiration, praise, and recognition for those with god complexes, Blaylock-Johnson says, adding that they cannot validate themselves. And as licensed marriage and family therapist Margalis Fjelstad, Ph.D., LMFT, previously explained to mbg, that's another core narcissist trait. "Validation for a narcissist counts only if it comes from others," she says.
Callous or unemotional behavior: Sometimes people with god complexes can be inexplicably cold to others or simply unemotional, Blaylock-Johnson says.
Isolation: There can be many reasons someone isolates themselves, and it's not always indicative of a god complex. But according to Blaylock-Johnson, "purposely isolating themselves because they think they're better than everybody else and don't need anyone else is different from social isolation due to depression or anxiety" and could be a sign of a god complex.
Unsuccessful long-term relationships: Does this person have close friendships that have lasted for years? If not, it might be worth looking at why. "If people have a difficult time maintaining long-term relationships, whether that's friendships or romantic relationships," Blaylock-Johnson says, "it could be a sign that the other parties have decided not to remain in contact with them, which is something to consider."
Disrespecting boundaries: A big reason people can end up walking away from those with god complexes, as aforementioned, is due to disrespecting boundaries, Blaylock-Johnson says. They may push people away "constantly crossing certain boundaries," she explains. As Fjelstad notes, narcissists similarly believe everything belongs to them, everyone thinks and feels the same as they do, and everyone wants the same things they do. "They are shocked and highly insulted to be told no," she says.
Lack of responsibility: When you have a god complex, Blaylock-Johnson says, you're not going to feel like anything you're doing is wrong—and you're certainly not going to feel like you have to change. In fact, far from it. According to Fjelstad, "Lack of responsibility is a glaring sign of a narcissist. Although narcissists want to be in control, they never want to be responsible for the results."
NPD or other mental illness: Lastly, a narcissistic personality disorder diagnosis is a likely indicator that someone will exhibit signs of a god complex. This can also happen with other mental illnesses in which mania is involved, such as bipolar disorder. "For some people, if they are in a manic episode, it can be marked by grandiosity, that inflated sense of self, or doing a lot of risky behaviors," Blaylock-Johnson notes.
Why would I need to know a lot, when I know Luke Chapter 4?
"And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain,
shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world
in a moment of time. And the devil said unto him,
All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them:
for that is delivered unto me;
and to whomsoever I will I give it."
You don't think the devil would overlook the kingdom of academia, do you?
brainwashing, also called Coercive Persuasion, systematic effort to persuade nonbelievers to accept a certain allegiance, command, or doctrine. A colloquial term, it is more generally applied to any technique designed to manipulate human thought or action against the desire, will, or knowledge of the individual. By controlling the physical and social environment, an attempt is made to destroy loyalties to any unfavorable groups or individuals, to demonstrate to the individual that his attitudes and patterns of thinking are incorrect and must be changed, and to develop loyalty and unquestioning obedience to the ruling party.
The term is most appropriately used in reference to a program of political or religious indoctrination or ideological remolding. The techniques of brainwashing typically involve isolation from former associates and sources of information; an exacting regimen requiring absolute obedience and humility; strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation; physical and psychological punishments for non-cooperation ranging from social ostracism and criticism, deprivation of food, sleep, and social contacts, to bondage and torture; and continual reinforcement.
The nature of brainwashing as it occurred in communist political prisons received widespread attention after the Chinese Communist victory in 1949 and after the Korean and Vietnamese wars. More recently, its reported use in fringe religious cults and radical political groups has aroused concern in the United States…
Deprogramming, or reversing the effects of brainwashing through intensive psychotherapy and confrontation, has proved somewhat successful, particularly with religious cult members.
The depth and permanence of changes in attitude and point of view depend on the personality of the individual, degree of motivation to be reformed, and the degree to which the environment supports the new frame of reference…
…The theory of groupthink was first developed by the social psychologist Irving Janis in his classic 1972 study, Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, which focused on the psychological mechanism behind foreign policy decisions such as the Pearl Harbor bombing, the Vietnam War, and the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Janis’s attempt to determine why groups consisting of highly intelligent individuals often made bad decisions renewed interest in the study of how group behaviors, biases, and pressures affect group decision making. Groupthink has become a widely accepted theory particularly in the fields of social psychology, foreign policy analysis, organizational theory, group decision-making sciences, and management. As such, the notion was revived to help explain the interpretation of intelligence information regarding weapons of mass destruction before the Iraq War (2003–11).
Janis identified a number of structural conditions leading to groupthink, related to the cohesiveness of a given decision-making group, the formal rules governing its decision-making process, the character of its leadership, the social homogeneity of participants, and the situational context they face.
The eight symptoms of groupthink include an illusion of invulnerability or of the inability to be wrong, the collective rationalization of the group’s decisions, an unquestioned belief in the morality of the group and its choices, stereotyping of the relevant opponents or out-group members, and the presence of “mind guards” who act as barriers to alternative or negative information, as well as self-censorship and an illusion of unanimity. Decision making affected by groupthink neglects possible alternatives and focuses on a narrow number of goals, ignoring the risks involved in a particular decision. It fails to seek out alternative information and is biased in its consideration of that which is available. Once rejected, alternatives are forgotten, and little attention is paid to contingency plans in case the preferred solution fails.
Proposals to prevent groupthink have included the introduction of multiple channels for dissent in decision making and mechanisms to preserve the openness and heterogeneity of a given group and have focused on the specific type of leadership required to prevent groupthink from occurring.
I don't get the connection between your post and the lines you quoted from me. Interesting article, though.
I notice you and some others constantly talking about and studying the human dynamics involved in diabolical cults. Do you believe in good cults?
I do believe that the adversary uses genuine human dynamics to achieve diabolical ends. My question to you is do you and the university people who study these things ever look at the positive sides of how the SAME human dynamics are designed to be used to construct useful societies of all sizes?
Whenever I see any kind of cult studies, I wonder if they ever study the benevolent cult of Jesus with 12 apostles and about 500 followers?
Does any one here actively think that there are good cults?
Why are those human dynamics there for the devil to exploit? I believe that there are good cults, and it was probably the case that VPW did also. I think he purposely used techniques that were to supposed help people in the Corps program, but degenerated as time went by.
For example, do you recognize anything resembling a good cult where things like limited and controlled isolation, or "us against them" is properly used to help in learning and commitment to worthy principles?
I don't get the connection between your post and the lines you quoted from me. Interesting article, though.
I notice you and some others constantly talking about and studying the human dynamics involved in diabolical cults. Do you believe in good cults?
I do believe that the adversary uses genuine human dynamics to achieve diabolical ends. My question to you is do you and the university people who study these things ever look at the positive sides of how the SAME human dynamics are designed to be used to construct useful societies of all sizes?
Whenever I see any kind of cult studies, I wonder if they ever study the benevolent cult of Jesus with 12 apostles and about 500 followers?
Does any one here actively think that there are good cults?
Why are those human dynamics there for the devil to exploit? I believe that there are good cults, and it was probably the case that VPW did also. I think he purposely used techniques that were to supposed help people in the Corps program, but degenerated as time went by.
For example, do you recognize anything resembling a good cult where things like limited and controlled isolation, or "us against them" is properly used to help in learning and commitment to worthy principles?
The generic term cult just applies to an assembly of people towards a cause.
So the definition is simply terminology and is benign good or evil.
Can people be assembled for a good cause? Of course they can.
But what we are talking about here is more the common cultural definition of the average person. Like the cult class taught by the young minister he just got down to “it feels culty”. He was meaning in an evil manipulative sense. Meaning that the average person sees questionable behavior in the areas of boundaries and control, in brainwashing, in isolation from families, society, and others with similar causes.
Teaching a mandatory tithe as opposed to allowing people to give from their heart like the widow with the mite, that is culty.
Doing so with returning no investment into the communities it originates from is culty.
Witnessing “the class” and not “Christ” is culty.
Making golden images of leaders is culty.
Having sales professionals in positions setting quotas for volunteers is culty.
Top down control is culty.
The Way Corps - is culty
Way Ambassadors - is culty
PFAL - a brainwash session - is culty. Read all the reasons we easily come up with to avoid it.
What is not culty?
Grassroots Christianity.
Jesus as your Lord and Savior.
Studying scripture to better yourself.
Witnessing to help people and share Christs love not fulfill a quota for a class by accosting people in malls, at events and through door to door witnessing during targeted planned “witnessing outings”.
Allowing people to grow in their worship of God without the controlled Intermediate class bullshonta.
Not introducing conspiracy theory as the basis for being “advanced”.
Not having positional pyramid structures for Pharisees to climb within “the household”.
Interacting with, working with, or accepting input from any other Christians or Christian organizations except their own.
Not Patting yourself on the back for “how many decades of spiritual wisdom” you have together in a group of idiots. That is culty.
Not Publishing a resume of yourself as a top leader in TWI where you inflate everything you have done as you taking the action when in reality it was saying “yes ma’am” 600,000 times. That is culty.
Excommunications. Have been culty since Martin Luther’s time. Haven’t changed.
Wow and that’s just some traits off the top of my head.
I guess now comes the return question. What about TWI do you feel makes it a “benevolent cult”?
I don't get the connection between your post and the lines you quoted from me. Interesting article, though.
I notice you and some others constantly talking about and studying the human dynamics involved in diabolical cults. Do you believe in good cults?
I do believe that the adversary uses genuine human dynamics to achieve diabolical ends. My question to you is do you and the university people who study these things ever look at the positive sides of how the SAME human dynamics are designed to be used to construct useful societies of all sizes?
Whenever I see any kind of cult studies, I wonder if they ever study the benevolent cult of Jesus with 12 apostles and about 500 followers?
Does any one here actively think that there are good cults?
Why are those human dynamics there for the devil to exploit? I believe that there are good cults, and it was probably the case that VPW did also. I think he purposely used techniques that were to supposed help people in the Corps program, but degenerated as time went by.
For example, do you recognize anything resembling a good cult where things like limited and controlled isolation, or "us against them" is properly used to help in learning and commitment to worthy principles?
So, you are embarrassed to discuss the cult behavior of Jesus and his disciples?
In as much as I wasn't around 2,000 years ago, I would prefer a discussion that centers, instead, around The Way International, a subject that has current relevancy.
In as much as I wasn't around 2,000 years ago, I would prefer a discussion that centers, instead, around The Way International, a subject that has current relevancy.
Remember that Mike still fellowships with the apostles.
I guess now comes the return question. What about TWI do you feel makes it a “benevolent cult”?
TWI was not the target of my questions. I think TWI-2 and -3 drifted deep into malevolent cult behavior. The early twigs I attended were benevolent.
What I was asking about were the human dynamics that malevolent cults use, and how they are analyzed here and by some academics.
My questions are about Jesus using the same techniques for his group, but in a godly, balanced manner.
My example was the technique of isolation and "us against them" mentality. I saw lots of good uses of that technique at times in early TWI, but also saw lots of bad uses in TWI's later years.
I think VPW tried and somewhat succeeded in keeping the Corps in the benevolent status, but his influence sharply dropped after 1982 with Craig at the wheel. I saw the Corps develop into a malevolent cult in the mid 1980s.
Just like white magic uses the same techniques as black magic but with benevolent intent.
I can see that for SOME reason, the Jesus cult is not taken seriously, or maybe it's because I am the one bringing it up. Maybe instead of embarrassment avoidance I sense, it may be fear that I have an ace up my sleeve and playing gotcha.
I have seen where academics are analyzing cults and they include Jesus in with the malevolent cults.
There were a couple of times Jesus sounded like he was the anti-family kind of a cult leader and urged followers to separate from family ties.
Maybe the avoidance here of the "Jesus cult" is because it doesn't fit in with cult theories? If there was any talk about this here, I never saw it, or don't remember it. I get a strong sense no one wants to talk about it now.
I can see that for SOME reason, the Jesus cult is not taken seriously, or maybe it's because I am the one bringing it up. Maybe instead of embarrassment avoidance I sense, it may be fear that I have an ace up my sleeve and playing gotcha.
I have seen where academics are analyzing cults and they include Jesus in with the malevolent cults.
There were a couple of times Jesus sounded like he was the anti-family kind of a cult leader and urged followers to separate from family ties.
Maybe the avoidance here of the "Jesus cult" is because it doesn't fit in with cult theories? If there was any talk about this here, I never saw it, or don't remember it. I get a strong sense no one wants to talk about it now.
You can't describe the difference between good and bad, either.
I can see that for SOME reason, the Jesus cult is not taken seriously, or maybe it's because I am the one bringing it up. Maybe instead of embarrassment avoidance I sense, it may be fear that I have an ace up my sleeve and playing gotcha.
I have seen where academics are analyzing cults and they include Jesus in with the malevolent cults.
There were a couple of times Jesus sounded like he was the anti-family kind of a cult leader and urged followers to separate from family ties.
Maybe the avoidance here of the "Jesus cult" is because it doesn't fit in with cult theories? If there was any talk about this here, I never saw it, or don't remember it. I get a strong sense no one wants to talk about it now.
No...it's just that Jesus wasn't a cult leader in the sense that wierwille was...which as soon as anyone agrees it gives u a link to wierwille and Christ. Remedial.
Jesus was certainly accused of being what we would call a cult leader in modern day times. But your giving support to the Pharisees accusation which is telling.
My questions are about Jesus using the same techniques for his group, but in a godly, balanced manner.
Unfortunately for you, those questions aren't relevant to the purpose of this discussion. Please demonstrate your justification, in the event you think they are.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
82
50
43
92
Popular Days
Jan 31
120
Feb 1
100
Feb 2
65
Feb 4
65
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 82 posts
T-Bone 50 posts
Bolshevik 43 posts
OldSkool 92 posts
Popular Days
Jan 31 2023
120 posts
Feb 1 2023
100 posts
Feb 2 2023
65 posts
Feb 4 2023
65 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
I knew someone who died trying to make it work. Then, the ministry blamed him for not having big enough believing. He left behind a wife and 2 young kids.
WordWolf
Every once in a while, in society and here, there's someone who engages in this specific fallacy. "I must be right because I'm in the minority." "I must be right because lots of people keep insistin
chockfull
As a different direction with respect to all of the philosophical angles on the law of believing, I am considering Jesus teachings in Matt 6:27 “which of you by taking thought can add one cubit to his
T-Bone
My previous post got me thinking of similarities of narcissism and the God complex…the following are a couple of excerpts from online – I thought Grease Spotters might enjoy reading:
A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of their error or failure, even in the face of irrefutable evidence, intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks. The person is also highly dogmatic in their views, meaning the person speaks of their personal opinions as though they were unquestionably correct.[1] Someone with a god complex may exhibit no regard for the conventions and demands of society, and may request special consideration or privileges.[
From: God complex - Wikipedia
~ ~ ~ ~
What it means to have a god complex.
To have a god complex essentially means someone is so fervently self-assured that they actually overestimate themselves, their abilities, and their entitlement. According to licensed clinical social worker De-Andrea Blaylock-Johnson, LCSW, the inflated sense of self is the biggest indicator.
That inflated sense of self, she notes, also translates into a lot of other characteristics, especially feeling better than everyone else. "They feel they're the smartest person in the room, they know best, and their reality is the reality—their experience is the experience," she says.
Ultimately, these people tend to take arrogance to the extreme, believing they can do whatever they want with little to no regard for others—and that they're justified in doing so. "It's referred to as a 'god complex' because it's this idea that 'I am the end-all-be-all,' and they don't even consider how their actions can impact others," Blaylock-Johnson adds.
Are people with god complexes also narcissists?
If you're thinking that god complexes sound a lot like narcissism, you wouldn't be far off. They're very similar, though not totally the same. "Often when people describe a god complex, they are referring to someone who may have traits of narcissistic personality disorder," Blaylock-Johnson explains, though they may not have an actual diagnosis.
Having a god complex isn't a diagnosable condition (that is, it's not a condition listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, aka the DSM-5), but narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is. Someone diagnosed with NPD is almost certainly going to exhibit some signs of a god complex, but someone with a god complex doesn't necessarily have NPD.
There's a lot of overlap, though, particularly with grandiose narcissism. Psychologist Perpetua Neo, DClinPsy, describes this as a particular type of narcissism, when "someone's narcissistic qualities—entitlement, braggadocio, and self-obsession—are openly displayed, often at the expense of others." This is very similar to a god complex.
As Blaylock-Johnson adds, however, "It's helpful to look at the different characteristics or traits people may be exhibiting to help you figure out how to handle the situation—but also you don't want to necessarily throw around diagnoses."
11 common signs to look out for:
Excerpts from: God Complex: What It Really Means + Why People Have Them | mindbodygreen
See also:
The Savior Complex | Psychology Today
Narcissistic Personality Disorder (God Complex) (thewallstreetpsychologist.com)
Closing the Gap between Psychology and God - Scientific American
10 Psychological Complexes That May Be Secretly Poisoning Your Life - Learning Mind (learning-mind.com)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
brainwashing, also called Coercive Persuasion, systematic effort to persuade nonbelievers to accept a certain allegiance, command, or doctrine. A colloquial term, it is more generally applied to any technique designed to manipulate human thought or action against the desire, will, or knowledge of the individual. By controlling the physical and social environment, an attempt is made to destroy loyalties to any unfavorable groups or individuals, to demonstrate to the individual that his attitudes and patterns of thinking are incorrect and must be changed, and to develop loyalty and unquestioning obedience to the ruling party.
The term is most appropriately used in reference to a program of political or religious indoctrination or ideological remolding. The techniques of brainwashing typically involve isolation from former associates and sources of information; an exacting regimen requiring absolute obedience and humility; strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation; physical and psychological punishments for non-cooperation ranging from social ostracism and criticism, deprivation of food, sleep, and social contacts, to bondage and torture; and continual reinforcement.
The nature of brainwashing as it occurred in communist political prisons received widespread attention after the Chinese Communist victory in 1949 and after the Korean and Vietnamese wars. More recently, its reported use in fringe religious cults and radical political groups has aroused concern in the United States…
Deprogramming, or reversing the effects of brainwashing through intensive psychotherapy and confrontation, has proved somewhat successful, particularly with religious cult members.
The depth and permanence of changes in attitude and point of view depend on the personality of the individual, degree of motivation to be reformed, and the degree to which the environment supports the new frame of reference…
…The theory of groupthink was first developed by the social psychologist Irving Janis in his classic 1972 study, Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, which focused on the psychological mechanism behind foreign policy decisions such as the Pearl Harbor bombing, the Vietnam War, and the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Janis’s attempt to determine why groups consisting of highly intelligent individuals often made bad decisions renewed interest in the study of how group behaviors, biases, and pressures affect group decision making. Groupthink has become a widely accepted theory particularly in the fields of social psychology, foreign policy analysis, organizational theory, group decision-making sciences, and management. As such, the notion was revived to help explain the interpretation of intelligence information regarding weapons of mass destruction before the Iraq War (2003–11).
Janis identified a number of structural conditions leading to groupthink, related to the cohesiveness of a given decision-making group, the formal rules governing its decision-making process, the character of its leadership, the social homogeneity of participants, and the situational context they face.
The eight symptoms of groupthink include an illusion of invulnerability or of the inability to be wrong, the collective rationalization of the group’s decisions, an unquestioned belief in the morality of the group and its choices, stereotyping of the relevant opponents or out-group members, and the presence of “mind guards” who act as barriers to alternative or negative information, as well as self-censorship and an illusion of unanimity. Decision making affected by groupthink neglects possible alternatives and focuses on a narrow number of goals, ignoring the risks involved in a particular decision. It fails to seek out alternative information and is biased in its consideration of that which is available. Once rejected, alternatives are forgotten, and little attention is paid to contingency plans in case the preferred solution fails.
Proposals to prevent groupthink have included the introduction of multiple channels for dissent in decision making and mechanisms to preserve the openness and heterogeneity of a given group and have focused on the specific type of leadership required to prevent groupthink from occurring.
Excerpts from: Suggestion | psychology | Britannica
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Duff-admissions
Sadomasochist’s role reversal: You know I am but what are you?
Constipation bias: preference for internalizing bull-$hit.
Circumvental reasoning: the rationale for getting around an argument.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I don't get the connection between your post and the lines you quoted from me. Interesting article, though.
I notice you and some others constantly talking about and studying the human dynamics involved in diabolical cults. Do you believe in good cults?
I do believe that the adversary uses genuine human dynamics to achieve diabolical ends. My question to you is do you and the university people who study these things ever look at the positive sides of how the SAME human dynamics are designed to be used to construct useful societies of all sizes?
Whenever I see any kind of cult studies, I wonder if they ever study the benevolent cult of Jesus with 12 apostles and about 500 followers?
Does any one here actively think that there are good cults?
Why are those human dynamics there for the devil to exploit? I believe that there are good cults, and it was probably the case that VPW did also. I think he purposely used techniques that were to supposed help people in the Corps program, but degenerated as time went by.
For example, do you recognize anything resembling a good cult where things like limited and controlled isolation, or "us against them" is properly used to help in learning and commitment to worthy principles?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
good deal - you've answered your own questions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Oh...you mean like white magic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Like asking if someone is a good witch, or a bad witch?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
NO! I mean like Jesus and followers 2000 years ago.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
The generic term cult just applies to an assembly of people towards a cause.
So the definition is simply terminology and is benign good or evil.
Can people be assembled for a good cause? Of course they can.
But what we are talking about here is more the common cultural definition of the average person. Like the cult class taught by the young minister he just got down to “it feels culty”. He was meaning in an evil manipulative sense. Meaning that the average person sees questionable behavior in the areas of boundaries and control, in brainwashing, in isolation from families, society, and others with similar causes.
Teaching a mandatory tithe as opposed to allowing people to give from their heart like the widow with the mite, that is culty.
Doing so with returning no investment into the communities it originates from is culty.
Witnessing “the class” and not “Christ” is culty.
Making golden images of leaders is culty.
Having sales professionals in positions setting quotas for volunteers is culty.
Top down control is culty.
The Way Corps - is culty
Way Ambassadors - is culty
PFAL - a brainwash session - is culty. Read all the reasons we easily come up with to avoid it.
What is not culty?
Grassroots Christianity.
Jesus as your Lord and Savior.
Studying scripture to better yourself.
Witnessing to help people and share Christs love not fulfill a quota for a class by accosting people in malls, at events and through door to door witnessing during targeted planned “witnessing outings”.
Allowing people to grow in their worship of God without the controlled Intermediate class bullshonta.
Not introducing conspiracy theory as the basis for being “advanced”.
Not having positional pyramid structures for Pharisees to climb within “the household”.
Interacting with, working with, or accepting input from any other Christians or Christian organizations except their own.
Not Patting yourself on the back for “how many decades of spiritual wisdom” you have together in a group of idiots. That is culty.
Not Publishing a resume of yourself as a top leader in TWI where you inflate everything you have done as you taking the action when in reality it was saying “yes ma’am” 600,000 times. That is culty.
Excommunications. Have been culty since Martin Luther’s time. Haven’t changed.
Wow and that’s just some traits off the top of my head.
I guess now comes the return question. What about TWI do you feel makes it a “benevolent cult”?
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Exactly. Same as a good cult vs bad cult
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I'm sure you've heard the "Ban Dihydrogen monoxide" joke, Mr. Academia.
The dose is the poison.
Why is a good cult good and a bad cult bad?
Because good is good and bad is bad?
Stupid is stupid.
Edited by BolshevikEdited for edits
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
So, you are embarrassed to discuss the cult behavior of Jesus and his disciples?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
In as much as I wasn't around 2,000 years ago, I would prefer a discussion that centers, instead, around The Way International, a subject that has current relevancy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Now u read wierwilles sins into Jesus and the Apostles...gnosticism at its finest.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Just like ur embarrassed with your position on hologram Jesus on the absent Christ thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Remember that Mike still fellowships with the apostles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
TWI was not the target of my questions. I think TWI-2 and -3 drifted deep into malevolent cult behavior. The early twigs I attended were benevolent.
What I was asking about were the human dynamics that malevolent cults use, and how they are analyzed here and by some academics.
My questions are about Jesus using the same techniques for his group, but in a godly, balanced manner.
My example was the technique of isolation and "us against them" mentality. I saw lots of good uses of that technique at times in early TWI, but also saw lots of bad uses in TWI's later years.
I think VPW tried and somewhat succeeded in keeping the Corps in the benevolent status, but his influence sharply dropped after 1982 with Craig at the wheel. I saw the Corps develop into a malevolent cult in the mid 1980s.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Just like white magic uses the same techniques as black magic but with benevolent intent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yeah. Pretty dry humor, that is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I can see that for SOME reason, the Jesus cult is not taken seriously, or maybe it's because I am the one bringing it up. Maybe instead of embarrassment avoidance I sense, it may be fear that I have an ace up my sleeve and playing gotcha.
I have seen where academics are analyzing cults and they include Jesus in with the malevolent cults.
There were a couple of times Jesus sounded like he was the anti-family kind of a cult leader and urged followers to separate from family ties.
Maybe the avoidance here of the "Jesus cult" is because it doesn't fit in with cult theories? If there was any talk about this here, I never saw it, or don't remember it. I get a strong sense no one wants to talk about it now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I'm saying you compared good cults and bad cults without saying anything.
Your inability to get detailed and only speak in generalizations means you have no practical knowledge of what you're talking about.
Edited by Bolshevikyur vs yor vs yer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You can't describe the difference between good and bad, either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
No...it's just that Jesus wasn't a cult leader in the sense that wierwille was...which as soon as anyone agrees it gives u a link to wierwille and Christ. Remedial.
Jesus was certainly accused of being what we would call a cult leader in modern day times. But your giving support to the Pharisees accusation which is telling.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Unfortunately for you, those questions aren't relevant to the purpose of this discussion. Please demonstrate your justification, in the event you think they are.
Edited by waysidergrammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.