Tell me something Wayfer Not. What is it *specifically* about non-trinitarianism that lends to TWI's 'cult'ness? Why should not believing that Jesus Christ is God = cult, hmmm?
Think about it.
See, this is one of the reasons why I don't give the 'cult' term too much credence overall. Like you can point at a group, and say with proven certainty, "Yea verily! That is a verifiable CULT!"
(Particularly when 'anti-cult' activists go on and on about how 'cults' and 'mind control' have nothing to do with religious beliefs, yet the Trinitarian factor always seems to creep in.)
So yes, lets loosen up our brains a little bit more, shall we?
Oh, and by the way, do you know that Jews and Muslims are also non-trinitarian?
Are they 'cults' too?
Just say "NO" to 'cult'-like acceptance of 'mind control' theories.
Lighten up a little Garth...The reason why non-trinitarian=cult, is because the vast majority of Christians are trinitarian. Perhaps the word "cult" is not to your taste, but many of us find the term to be appropriate. The staunch trinitarians will tell you that wierwille's views are to be considered heresy. It's the non-trinitarian doctrine of twi, more than anything else, that has seperated and alienated twi from other Christian churches...and we all know this stuff. I contend that wierwille knew full well that his non-trinitarian teachings would seperate twi from other churches...and that's WHY he taught it.Wierwille would not allow "his" ministry to be integrated into mainstream Christianity...he NEEDED twi to be a "cult", so that he could be the MOG! Big MOG in a little pond...His self righteous, condemning attitude towards trinitarians was calculated. It was all about singling himself out. He needed the controversy to do what he did...So yes, twi was and is a cult in the truest sense of the word...and their non-trinitarian doctrine contributes greatly to that designation.
If following the most common view was a requirement for being a positive group (or non-cult) then we wouldn't have the civil rights movement, modern science (Does the Sun still revolve around the earth?), women's suffrage, etc. Maybe the NAACP is a cult too?
I think the unique belief distinguishes the cult, or group.. but destructive behavior defines it. And usually- they will fight to the death to defend their unique belief, and simply ignore the destructive behavior.
Wayfer Not, some of the experiences have been the same for me- as far as dismissing folks as being "nuts" for holding beliefs that they do. Several weeks ago I went to a Unitarian Universalist church one morning.. that was REALLY different, but I would not call them a cult exactly. I actually sat there trying to figure out what they had to offer, or what they were about without jumping up and screaming "you're all possessed" or some such nonsense, heh heh. Maybe there's hope for us after all..
Whether to use the word "cult" or not, is just a matter of semantics. You can call it an "icecream social" for all I care. The name you give it doesn't change what they did to people. It doesn't change the lies, the false doctrines, the abuses, the scandals, etc., etc. Some folks don't like the word "brainwashed" either...ok, so call it "Christian education"...It doesn't matter what label what you put on it. What it did to folks is still the same.
Tell me something Wayfer Not. What is it *specifically* about non-trinitarianism that lends to TWI's 'cult'ness? Why should not believing that Jesus Christ is God = cult, hmmm?
Garth if you re-read what I wrote, I didn't say that non-trinitarian beliefs contribute to an organization being a cult. I only mentioned that the non-trinitarian belief was a controversial doctrine.
IMHO a cult is an organization with a mind-set that they have all the answers and that no other organization has the truth like they do. A cult also has an attitude that harm will come to those who leave their organization. TWI, JWs, Mormons all fall in to this category.
Even though I disagree wholeheartedly with their doctrines for the most part, I want to be understanding and sympathetic toward people in those organizations instead of being to darn black and white. I would embrace something like Universal Unitarianism more than any of those organizations only because they are not condemning of other beliefs or groups. That is the point I am trying to make. I don't want to be judgmental, but I want to keep Jesus in the picture too.
Garth, I'm sorry my brain isn't loose enough for you....but we all move at our own pace and develop different thought processes. Can you accept that? :P-->
What GrouchoMarxJr fails to realize is the destructive nature in the term itself when applied to ((cough)) 'false doctrines' as a determiner of such terms.
Just stop and think about it for a minute, why don't you. Whether or not Wierwille intended to 'seperate' himself from mainstream Christianity (as tho' that's a big crime in and of itself. Which it really isn't) is beside the point. Think about how many mainstream church leaders use adherence to the trinitarian dogma to define the the 'cult' term. And the term 'cult' itself is quite a highly and emotionally charged term. "If you follow this teaching, then you're getting involved in a cult!", a charge that many good people shy away from/are scared of having pointed at them. Talk about 'loading the language', ... hmmmm? And isn't loading the language one of the hallmarks of a 'cult'? If so, then why would mainstream leaders/anti-cult groups violate their own rules by doing the same 'loading of the language'?
It goes beyond semantics, beyond 'synonyms' for a term, so to speak. I mean, being told "If you follow this teaching, then you're getting involved in a ice cream social!" just doesn't have that same scare tactic effect, know what I mean? The term itself, as used in regards to questionable groups and doctrines, is often about as manipulative and intimidating as the abusive groups themselves.
Garth, I'm sorry my brain isn't loose enough for you....but we all move at our own pace and develop different thought processes. Can you accept that?
Sure I can accept that. I never indicated otherwise. ...
... just if you can accept that I have my valid reasons for griping about the seemingly manipulative and emotional 'throwing about like water' (to me anyway) of the 'cult' term.
Anyway, its all part of the discussion and points raised about this kind of topic, isn't it? The pros AND the cons of concepts like this.
I think the definition of a "cult" would have to include:
They either discourage or forbid you to associate with outsiders - in varying degrees - subtle putdowns, to actual physical bondage and isolation. People who were in Corps and who worked at HQ were in physical isolation - how many people in those locales were friends with "townies"? or worked with "townies"??
After that - led by one man, much control over daily lives, lots of money and work asked for.
I'm not one to argue over semantics, I got enough of that in TWI. I understand what you're saying WayferNot! and I deal with the same thing.
There's a guy at work who is getting all involved with some "Landmark" something or other. It's supposedly some "self help" group and they meet every Wed night and I just recently found out they have different classes you can take (for a nominal fee) and how far you decide to go is up to you (e.g. how much $$ do you want to spend on classes?). They have something going on almost every night of the week and this guy is inviting everyone at work to go and he's pretty darn persistant.
I told him I just got out of a cult and that I have no desire to join up with a group that preaches "personal accountability" and requires classes because that usually means that you're being held accountable for the things that THEY deem important. He's pretty much left me alone with that.
Another co-worker invited me to her church and it's one I HAD been interested in but then I found out you HAVE to take a class to become a member. Then I started hearing about the hierarchy in that church..... no thanks! I told 'em I'm through with classes and people telling me what I have to do to be spiritual enough to associate with them.
I know what you mean about the JW girl. She doesn't realize that she's in the same controlling type of organization and that she COULD be much free-er and happier if she left, but people have to see it for themselves and make up their own minds. IF you wanted to get involved with her life you could ask her questions like, "IF you could celebrate your birthday have you thought about what kind of cake you would want?" or if it bothers her missing out on all the stuff that "normal" people do. :D--> It bothered me.
Otherwise, I've adopted the attitude that "everyone is doing the best they can." She's doing what she was taught and is handling as much as she can at the moment. I'm learning to accept people as they are, stupid beliefs or not. I have started learning a lot from others just by listening. I may not agree with them, but asking questions and just being "open" to hear that there IS another viewpoint out there that I might not have considered before has been a pretty wild ride. I can't save everyone, so I just keep on truckin' 'cause I'm still trying to figure life out myself.
You're right Garth...the word "cult" does carry with it "a destructive nature". That's why I use it to describe twi. I suppose if a lot of folks thought that it really WAS an icecream social, maybe they wouldn't hestitate in selling their assets and giving them to twi...afterall, everybody knows that icecream socials are a good thing...but on the other hand, if I call it a cult...maybe they will pause to think about what they are getting involved with. Whether or not twi fits your definition of a cult (maybe you think there are no such things as cults), I find it appropriate that such a term be attached to this "outfit". It's easier than simply calling it a "dangerous group" and more effective as well.
As far as your question..."And isn't loading the language one of the hallmarks of a 'cult'?"
Where do you draw the line between "loading the language" and simply utilizing the most appropriate word to describe what you are attempting to communicate? C'mon Garth...If you don't use words to describe things...shall we use sign language? ...or perhaps draw pictures?
Part of the GSC homepage link to 'What is a cult' says that cult leaders claim to have a special relationship with God. VP did, Joseph Smith did, and, ahem, so does the pope. The word 'cult' loses some of its fizz if TWI is a cult because of its doctrine, but the RC church is not.
Speaking of special relationships, it seems to me that some of the TWI spinoffs were started by people who claim to have had a special relationship with...VPW!!!
You're right Garth...the word "cult" does carry with it "a destructive nature".
That's not what I said. Read what I said again. I said the USAGE of the term often is destructive in nature, particulrly when people use it either to keep others in line with orthodox doctrine, or in intimidating people from joining up with groups that they don't know about or who aren't mainstream for that matter, even if those selfsame groups do wind up being destructive in nature.
Think of how emotionally charged that term is. Cult. Hell it's short, blunt, it doesn't sound easy on the ears. Scary sounding even. Words are often like that, especially when the term/usage is hammered into society to where when you mention the term 'cult', what kind of mental image do you get? And keep in mind that before the 60s-70s, the term cult was more neutral in usage/meaning: "A group of people following a person, idea, or thing." Along comes folks like Dr. Singer, and transform the term into something scary.
That's what I mean by 'loading the terminology' in my previous post as per its anti-cult usage. They see the 'cults' transform words like 'believing', 'available', etc., towards their own purposes; bingo! 'Loading the terminology'. So what do they do? Go and do the same thing. Use the 'cult' term for their own purposes in driving up the fear factor.
I understand that we need to show where specific destructive groups are harming people, and words are needed to communicate the alarm and warning. So why does doctrinal differences/'heresy' need to have anything to do with it? For example, you said that the majority of Christians are trinitarian and that they view non-trinitarianism=cult. You also said that the word 'cult' communicates destructive behavior and the like ... Now just stop and think of the discrepancy here please. WTF does non-trinitarianism have to do with destructive behavior, hmmm? I can think of **MANY** destructive things done by trinitarians, in the Name of trinitarianism even, that FAR exceeds anything done by TWI, ... and you know it.
And this 'overlap' as it were, occurs in people's thinking re: 'cults' and they don't even realize it. ..... Are they then 'brainwashed' perhaps?
Like I said, it goes beyond semantics, or that I "don't like the 'cult' term". (But oversimplifying my reasons like that would be more convenient for you, wouldn't it?)
It didnt matter to me when I was in a cult what people thought about the group.
It is the same with people involved in any activity we may think we know is wrong for the most part.
I do not mind the word cult, I think we can get fooled or tricked or do things in our life for peer pressure and sales in many many area's.
I think Walmart is a cult. I do they have struck gold with a calculated program that is not to recognize individuals only the good of the corporation.
I do not think cult have to be "wrong", or nessesarily "destructive" my friend in is having the time of his life right now in twi, and I know many walmart associates who do 'the cheer" with joy!
where do we seperate what our own unigue truth is in life and what others tell us. It begins in adolesence and ends in death I think.
It is important places like GS happen because it gives these groupsa chance to be exposed.
I know wafer not your position may be to help the person in your office avid being hurt. We can seldom do that for people een those we love much . sad but true.
I witness folks compromising their life for many many things i considr worthless, and can not stop it,but i can share my life and be happy within what God has blesssedme with and hope others can find the same .
prayer works for me to help another understand where Im coming from on topics that cause confusion.
Okay Wayfer Not, I see what you were sayihng about the JW now, and that it doesn't directly tie in to the trinitarian issue in that respect. My apologies to you for that mea culpa.
Too bad that there are still many people who do make that connection between non-trinitarian beliefs - 'cults'. :(-->
Garth...Being non-trinitarian has NOTHING to do with destructive behavior, IMHO. The trinitarians perceive them as heretics and that is why THEY call them a cult. I call them a cult for other reasons.
I do believe that twi followers are involved with destructive behavior, but that is NOT why I call them a cult either. I tell people that twi is a cult so that they will avoid getting involved with destructive behavior...BUT the destructive behavior is not what makes them a cult.
I agree with your description of what the word cult triggers in people's minds...and again, I find twi worthy of such a title.
That's part of it, as there are those who would look down upon, or view dimly those who were involved with the so-called 'cults'. Ie., "So-o-o, you were involved in a cult, ehh? Have you repented of it yet? What doctrine do you now believe? Still believe that Jesus isn't God yet? Well then, apparently you still are influenced (or still have 'Way brain')". Ie., its almost like being 'on probation', and there is the undercurrent of 'redeeming yourself' back to some orthodox view before you are 'good enough' again.
Now I know that isn't the only response that people give. Responses can range from "Oh wow man, what was it like?" to "I'll pray for your soul" to "That's nice" to a simple shrug of the shoulders.
But the very term itself has a lot more hype than substance to it overall (IMHO anyway). And what people do/react as a result of such terms. And related and questionable 'science' regarding 'mind control', 'brainwashing', 'loading the terms', 'thought stopping techniques', and the like.
Ie., by people who evidently take flicks like The Manchurian Candidate W-A-Y too seriously.
For the record, I have known of regular, Christian churches practicing cult behavior: controlling congretations' lives, undying loyalty to a psychotic leader, excommunication for refusal of beliefs, fear tactics, etc.
For the record, I have known of regular, Christian churches practicing cult behavior: controlling congretations' lives, undying loyalty to a psychotic leader, excommunication for refusal of beliefs, fear tactics, etc.
So Wayfer Not, would Benedict Arnol--ahh I mean XVI qualify as a 'cult leader'?
Recommended Posts
GarthP2000
Tell me something Wayfer Not. What is it *specifically* about non-trinitarianism that lends to TWI's 'cult'ness? Why should not believing that Jesus Christ is God = cult, hmmm?
Think about it.
See, this is one of the reasons why I don't give the 'cult' term too much credence overall. Like you can point at a group, and say with proven certainty, "Yea verily! That is a verifiable CULT!"
(Particularly when 'anti-cult' activists go on and on about how 'cults' and 'mind control' have nothing to do with religious beliefs, yet the Trinitarian factor always seems to creep in.)
So yes, lets loosen up our brains a little bit more, shall we?
Oh, and by the way, do you know that Jews and Muslims are also non-trinitarian?
Are they 'cults' too?
Just say "NO" to 'cult'-like acceptance of 'mind control' theories.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Lighten up a little Garth...The reason why non-trinitarian=cult, is because the vast majority of Christians are trinitarian. Perhaps the word "cult" is not to your taste, but many of us find the term to be appropriate. The staunch trinitarians will tell you that wierwille's views are to be considered heresy. It's the non-trinitarian doctrine of twi, more than anything else, that has seperated and alienated twi from other Christian churches...and we all know this stuff. I contend that wierwille knew full well that his non-trinitarian teachings would seperate twi from other churches...and that's WHY he taught it.Wierwille would not allow "his" ministry to be integrated into mainstream Christianity...he NEEDED twi to be a "cult", so that he could be the MOG! Big MOG in a little pond...His self righteous, condemning attitude towards trinitarians was calculated. It was all about singling himself out. He needed the controversy to do what he did...So yes, twi was and is a cult in the truest sense of the word...and their non-trinitarian doctrine contributes greatly to that designation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
If following the most common view was a requirement for being a positive group (or non-cult) then we wouldn't have the civil rights movement, modern science (Does the Sun still revolve around the earth?), women's suffrage, etc. Maybe the NAACP is a cult too?
JT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I think the unique belief distinguishes the cult, or group.. but destructive behavior defines it. And usually- they will fight to the death to defend their unique belief, and simply ignore the destructive behavior.
Wayfer Not, some of the experiences have been the same for me- as far as dismissing folks as being "nuts" for holding beliefs that they do. Several weeks ago I went to a Unitarian Universalist church one morning.. that was REALLY different, but I would not call them a cult exactly. I actually sat there trying to figure out what they had to offer, or what they were about without jumping up and screaming "you're all possessed" or some such nonsense, heh heh. Maybe there's hope for us after all..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Whether to use the word "cult" or not, is just a matter of semantics. You can call it an "icecream social" for all I care. The name you give it doesn't change what they did to people. It doesn't change the lies, the false doctrines, the abuses, the scandals, etc., etc. Some folks don't like the word "brainwashed" either...ok, so call it "Christian education"...It doesn't matter what label what you put on it. What it did to folks is still the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Garth if you re-read what I wrote, I didn't say that non-trinitarian beliefs contribute to an organization being a cult. I only mentioned that the non-trinitarian belief was a controversial doctrine.
IMHO a cult is an organization with a mind-set that they have all the answers and that no other organization has the truth like they do. A cult also has an attitude that harm will come to those who leave their organization. TWI, JWs, Mormons all fall in to this category.
Even though I disagree wholeheartedly with their doctrines for the most part, I want to be understanding and sympathetic toward people in those organizations instead of being to darn black and white. I would embrace something like Universal Unitarianism more than any of those organizations only because they are not condemning of other beliefs or groups. That is the point I am trying to make. I don't want to be judgmental, but I want to keep Jesus in the picture too.
Garth, I'm sorry my brain isn't loose enough for you....but we all move at our own pace and develop different thought processes. Can you accept that?
:P-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
What GrouchoMarxJr fails to realize is the destructive nature in the term itself when applied to ((cough)) 'false doctrines' as a determiner of such terms.
Just stop and think about it for a minute, why don't you. Whether or not Wierwille intended to 'seperate' himself from mainstream Christianity (as tho' that's a big crime in and of itself. Which it really isn't) is beside the point. Think about how many mainstream church leaders use adherence to the trinitarian dogma to define the the 'cult' term. And the term 'cult' itself is quite a highly and emotionally charged term. "If you follow this teaching, then you're getting involved in a cult!", a charge that many good people shy away from/are scared of having pointed at them. Talk about 'loading the language', ... hmmmm? And isn't loading the language one of the hallmarks of a 'cult'? If so, then why would mainstream leaders/anti-cult groups violate their own rules by doing the same 'loading of the language'?
It goes beyond semantics, beyond 'synonyms' for a term, so to speak. I mean, being told "If you follow this teaching, then you're getting involved in a ice cream social!" just doesn't have that same scare tactic effect, know what I mean? The term itself, as used in regards to questionable groups and doctrines, is often about as manipulative and intimidating as the abusive groups themselves.
So no, I won't 'lighten up'. :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Sure I can accept that. I never indicated otherwise. ...
... just if you can accept that I have my valid reasons for griping about the seemingly manipulative and emotional 'throwing about like water' (to me anyway) of the 'cult' term.
Anyway, its all part of the discussion and points raised about this kind of topic, isn't it? The pros AND the cons of concepts like this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CircleGame
I think the definition of a "cult" would have to include:
They either discourage or forbid you to associate with outsiders - in varying degrees - subtle putdowns, to actual physical bondage and isolation. People who were in Corps and who worked at HQ were in physical isolation - how many people in those locales were friends with "townies"? or worked with "townies"??
After that - led by one man, much control over daily lives, lots of money and work asked for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I'm not one to argue over semantics, I got enough of that in TWI. I understand what you're saying WayferNot! and I deal with the same thing.
There's a guy at work who is getting all involved with some "Landmark" something or other. It's supposedly some "self help" group and they meet every Wed night and I just recently found out they have different classes you can take (for a nominal fee) and how far you decide to go is up to you (e.g. how much $$ do you want to spend on classes?). They have something going on almost every night of the week and this guy is inviting everyone at work to go and he's pretty darn persistant.
I told him I just got out of a cult and that I have no desire to join up with a group that preaches "personal accountability" and requires classes because that usually means that you're being held accountable for the things that THEY deem important. He's pretty much left me alone with that.
Another co-worker invited me to her church and it's one I HAD been interested in but then I found out you HAVE to take a class to become a member. Then I started hearing about the hierarchy in that church..... no thanks! I told 'em I'm through with classes and people telling me what I have to do to be spiritual enough to associate with them.
I know what you mean about the JW girl. She doesn't realize that she's in the same controlling type of organization and that she COULD be much free-er and happier if she left, but people have to see it for themselves and make up their own minds. IF you wanted to get involved with her life you could ask her questions like, "IF you could celebrate your birthday have you thought about what kind of cake you would want?" or if it bothers her missing out on all the stuff that "normal" people do.
:D--> It bothered me.
Otherwise, I've adopted the attitude that "everyone is doing the best they can." She's doing what she was taught and is handling as much as she can at the moment. I'm learning to accept people as they are, stupid beliefs or not. I have started learning a lot from others just by listening. I may not agree with them, but asking questions and just being "open" to hear that there IS another viewpoint out there that I might not have considered before has been a pretty wild ride.
I can't save everyone, so I just keep on truckin' 'cause I'm still trying to figure life out myself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
You're right Garth...the word "cult" does carry with it "a destructive nature". That's why I use it to describe twi. I suppose if a lot of folks thought that it really WAS an icecream social, maybe they wouldn't hestitate in selling their assets and giving them to twi...afterall, everybody knows that icecream socials are a good thing...but on the other hand, if I call it a cult...maybe they will pause to think about what they are getting involved with. Whether or not twi fits your definition of a cult (maybe you think there are no such things as cults), I find it appropriate that such a term be attached to this "outfit". It's easier than simply calling it a "dangerous group" and more effective as well.
As far as your question..."And isn't loading the language one of the hallmarks of a 'cult'?"
Where do you draw the line between "loading the language" and simply utilizing the most appropriate word to describe what you are attempting to communicate? C'mon Garth...If you don't use words to describe things...shall we use sign language? ...or perhaps draw pictures?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Part of the GSC homepage link to 'What is a cult' says that cult leaders claim to have a special relationship with God. VP did, Joseph Smith did, and, ahem, so does the pope. The word 'cult' loses some of its fizz if TWI is a cult because of its doctrine, but the RC church is not.
Speaking of special relationships, it seems to me that some of the TWI spinoffs were started by people who claim to have had a special relationship with...VPW!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
That's not what I said. Read what I said again. I said the USAGE of the term often is destructive in nature, particulrly when people use it either to keep others in line with orthodox doctrine, or in intimidating people from joining up with groups that they don't know about or who aren't mainstream for that matter, even if those selfsame groups do wind up being destructive in nature.
Think of how emotionally charged that term is. Cult. Hell it's short, blunt, it doesn't sound easy on the ears. Scary sounding even. Words are often like that, especially when the term/usage is hammered into society to where when you mention the term 'cult', what kind of mental image do you get? And keep in mind that before the 60s-70s, the term cult was more neutral in usage/meaning: "A group of people following a person, idea, or thing." Along comes folks like Dr. Singer, and transform the term into something scary.
That's what I mean by 'loading the terminology' in my previous post as per its anti-cult usage. They see the 'cults' transform words like 'believing', 'available', etc., towards their own purposes; bingo! 'Loading the terminology'. So what do they do? Go and do the same thing. Use the 'cult' term for their own purposes in driving up the fear factor.
I understand that we need to show where specific destructive groups are harming people, and words are needed to communicate the alarm and warning. So why does doctrinal differences/'heresy' need to have anything to do with it? For example, you said that the majority of Christians are trinitarian and that they view non-trinitarianism=cult. You also said that the word 'cult' communicates destructive behavior and the like ... Now just stop and think of the discrepancy here please. WTF does non-trinitarianism have to do with destructive behavior, hmmm? I can think of **MANY** destructive things done by trinitarians, in the Name of trinitarianism even, that FAR exceeds anything done by TWI, ... and you know it.
And this 'overlap' as it were, occurs in people's thinking re: 'cults' and they don't even realize it. ..... Are they then 'brainwashed' perhaps?
Like I said, it goes beyond semantics, or that I "don't like the 'cult' term". (But oversimplifying my reasons like that would be more convenient for you, wouldn't it?)
Think about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
It didnt matter to me when I was in a cult what people thought about the group.
It is the same with people involved in any activity we may think we know is wrong for the most part.
I do not mind the word cult, I think we can get fooled or tricked or do things in our life for peer pressure and sales in many many area's.
I think Walmart is a cult. I do they have struck gold with a calculated program that is not to recognize individuals only the good of the corporation.
I do not think cult have to be "wrong", or nessesarily "destructive" my friend in is having the time of his life right now in twi, and I know many walmart associates who do 'the cheer" with joy!
where do we seperate what our own unigue truth is in life and what others tell us. It begins in adolesence and ends in death I think.
It is important places like GS happen because it gives these groupsa chance to be exposed.
I know wafer not your position may be to help the person in your office avid being hurt. We can seldom do that for people een those we love much . sad but true.
I witness folks compromising their life for many many things i considr worthless, and can not stop it,but i can share my life and be happy within what God has blesssedme with and hope others can find the same .
prayer works for me to help another understand where Im coming from on topics that cause confusion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Okay Wayfer Not, I see what you were sayihng about the JW now, and that it doesn't directly tie in to the trinitarian issue in that respect. My apologies to you for that mea culpa.
Too bad that there are still many people who do make that connection between non-trinitarian beliefs - 'cults'.
:(-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Garth...Being non-trinitarian has NOTHING to do with destructive behavior, IMHO. The trinitarians perceive them as heretics and that is why THEY call them a cult. I call them a cult for other reasons.
I do believe that twi followers are involved with destructive behavior, but that is NOT why I call them a cult either. I tell people that twi is a cult so that they will avoid getting involved with destructive behavior...BUT the destructive behavior is not what makes them a cult.
I agree with your description of what the word cult triggers in people's minds...and again, I find twi worthy of such a title.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Garth is thinking of individuals that are involved or have been involved-not the organization as a whole.
And his will to help protect these people from more harm by this label.
Am I right Garth?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
CM,
That's part of it, as there are those who would look down upon, or view dimly those who were involved with the so-called 'cults'. Ie., "So-o-o, you were involved in a cult, ehh? Have you repented of it yet? What doctrine do you now believe? Still believe that Jesus isn't God yet? Well then, apparently you still are influenced (or still have 'Way brain')". Ie., its almost like being 'on probation', and there is the undercurrent of 'redeeming yourself' back to some orthodox view before you are 'good enough' again.
Now I know that isn't the only response that people give. Responses can range from "Oh wow man, what was it like?" to "I'll pray for your soul" to "That's nice" to a simple shrug of the shoulders.
But the very term itself has a lot more hype than substance to it overall (IMHO anyway). And what people do/react as a result of such terms. And related and questionable 'science' regarding 'mind control', 'brainwashing', 'loading the terms', 'thought stopping techniques', and the like.
Ie., by people who evidently take flicks like The Manchurian Candidate W-A-Y too seriously.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Quote by GrouchM:
Groucho, I would have considered destructive behavior a large part of a cult. What do you define as a cult?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
For the record, I have known of regular, Christian churches practicing cult behavior: controlling congretations' lives, undying loyalty to a psychotic leader, excommunication for refusal of beliefs, fear tactics, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
i see your points garth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
So Wayfer Not, would Benedict Arnol--ahh I mean XVI qualify as a 'cult leader'?
Think about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
I don't know. Who is XVI?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Oh good grief....
Perhaps a "way brain attack" could be defined as an overeaction to the word "cult."
:D-->
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.