CULTS....

by Snoozy 14 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Snoozy
    Snoozy

    I have been throwing that word around a lot lately since having a few active witnesses on my facebook page. I thought I would look up some info on the word.

    I saw some interesting observations and studies. Including one from Steve Hassan)sp?)

    An additional commonly used subcategory of cult movements are the doomsday cults, characterized by the central role played by eschatology in these groups' belief systems. Although most religious movements adhere to some beliefs about the eventual end of the world as we know it, in doomsday cults, these tend to take the form of concrete prophesies and predictions of specific catastrophic events being imminent, or in some cases, even expected to occur on a particular calendar date. This category of religious movements includes some well-known cases of extremely destructive behavior by adherents in anticipation of the end of times, such as the mass suicide by members of the Peoples Temple in 1978, the Branch Davidians in 1993 and the Heaven's Gate in 1997, although many examples are known of doomsday cults that do not become nearly as destructive. This latter class of doomsday cults are of theoretical interest to the scholarly study of cults, because of the often paradoxical response of adherents to the failure of doomsday prophesies to be confirmed. Social psychologist Leon Festinger and his collaborators performed a detailed case study of one such group in 1954, subsequently documented in "When Prophecy Fails". The members of a small, obscure UFO cult in question were very quick to amend their world-view so as to rationalize the unexpected outcome without losing their conviction about the validity of the underlying belief system, despite the obvious evidence to the contrary. The authors explained this phenomenon within the framework of the cognitive dissonance theory, which posits that people are in general motivated to adjust their beliefs so as to be consistent with their behavior, in order to avoid the painful experience of a dissonance between the two. On this account, the more committed one is at the behavioral level to their beliefs being true, the more driven one is to reduce the tension created by dis-confirming evidence. An important implication of this theory is that common, universal psychological factors contribute to the persistence of what otherwise appear to be bizarre and even absurd set of beliefs.

    Some authors in the cult opposition dislike the word cult to the extent it implies that there is a continuum with a large gray area separating "cult" from "noncult" which they do not see. [ 64 ] Others authors, e.g. Steven Hassan, differentiate by using words and terms like "Destructive cult," or "Cult" (totalitarian type) vs. "benign cult."

    Snoozy

  • Snoozy
    Snoozy

    Main article: Mind control

    Studies performed by those who believe that some religious groups do practice mind control have identified a number of key steps in coercive persuasion: [ 31 ] [ 32 ]

    1. People are put in physical or emotionally distressing situations;
    2. Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;
    3. They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader or group;
    4. They get a new identity based on the group;
    5. They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled. [ 3

    There are several ways people leave a cult: [ 43 ] [ 44 ] Popular authors Conway and Siegelman conducted a survey and published it in the book Snapping regarding after-cult effects and deprogramming and concluded that people deprogrammed had fewer problems than people not deprogrammed. The BBC writes that, "in a survey done by Jill Mytton on 200 former cult members most of them reported problems adjusting to society and about a third would benefit from some counseling". [ 45 ]

    According to F. Derks and J. van der Lans, there is no uniform post-cult trauma. While psychological and social problems upon resignation are not uncommon, their character and intensity are greatly dependent on the personal history and on the traits of the ex-member, and on the reasons for and way of resignation.[

    Upon leaving :

    See also: Apostasy: Other religious movements and Anti-cult movement: Former members

    The role of former members, or "apostates," has been widely studied by social scientists. At times, these individuals become outspoken public critics of the groups they leave. Their motivations, the roles they play in the anti-cult movement, the validity of their testimony, and the kinds of narratives they construct, are controversial. Some scholars like David G. Bromley, Anson Shupe, and Brian R. Wilson have challenged the validity of the testimonies presented by critical former members. Wilson discusses the use of the atrocity story that is rehearsed by the apostate to explain how, by manipulation, coercion, or deceit, he was recruited to a group that he now condemns. [ 56 ] The hostile ex-members would invariably shade the truth and blow out of proportion minor incidents, turning them into major incidents. [ 57 ] Bromley and Shupe similarly discuss "captivity narratives" that depict the time in the group as involuntary and point out that the apostate is likely to present a caricature of his former group. [citation needed] Introvigne found in his study of the New Acropolis in France, that public negative testimonies and attitudes were only voiced by a minority of the ex-members, who he describes as becoming "professional enemies" of the group they leave. [citation needed] Scholars who tend to side more with critical former members are usually critical of cults themselves and include Margaret Singer, Benjamin Zablocki and Philip Lucas [neutrality is disputed] . Zablocki performed an empirical study that concludes that the reliability of former members was equal to that of those who stayed in one particular group. [citation needed] Lucas found the same empirical results. [citation needed]

    Snoozy

  • thetrueone
    thetrueone
    Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.

    1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

    2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

    3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

    4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

    5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

    6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

    7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

    8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

    9. The group/leader is always right.

    10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

    Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader.

    1. Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.

    2. Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.

    3. Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".

    4. Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.

    5. Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.

    6. Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.

    7. A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.

    8. Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.

    9. Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.

    10. Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.
  • Snoozy
    Snoozy

    True one, do you have a link to the info?

    Snoozy

  • thetrueone
    thetrueone

    There is much information about cults and their operating structure at this web site.

    http://www.rickross.com/

  • Snoozy
    Snoozy

    Thanks trueone..I remember that name.

    I also looked up the Feb 15 WT and saw where they were coming down on their people associating even with those that have been disassociated now. (Including relatives) The Magazine article includes them in with the "Lawless" ones that are to be destroyed.

    A few years ago my JW MIL asked her elders at her hall if she could associate with me and they told her yes but to not talk about the bible with me..They even got a copy of my disassociation letter. I guess now they consider me a 'Lawless One"...

    Definitely a #5 on the list!

    Snoozy

  • thetrueone
    thetrueone

    I also looked up the Feb 15 WT and saw where they were coming down on their people associating even with those that have been disassociated now. (Including relatives) The Magazine article includes them in with the "Lawless" ones that are to be destroyed.

    Really I'd like to read that article, is that in Feb.15/2011 ?

    This was mentioned some time ago and brought to my attention briefly by my JW sister one day and I was taken back

    by her statement, the astonishing thing is I never really said anything in opposition to the JWS directly to any of my family members who

    are still in, I have been very apologetic and respectful toward their beliefs for as far back as personally fading away myself.

    So if anyone has access to that article I would appreciate what it curtails in content.

  • Snoozy
    Snoozy

    thetrueone, it is in the thread about the Feb 15 WT. I looked it up and then pasted it to my post.

    Quote from 2-15-11 Watchtower:

    "15 Do we share Jesus’ view of those who
    have become set in their lawless course?We
    need to give thought to these questions:
    ‘Would I choose to associate regularly with
    someone who has been disfellowshipped
    or who has disassociated himself from the
    Christian congregation? What if that one
    is a close relative who no longer lives at
    home?’ Such a situation can be a real test of
    our love of righteousness and of our loyalty
    to God"

    It goes on to give examples.
    Someone gave me a link to a place where you can download the latest Magazines (Watchtower and Awake)

    I can't post a direct link but this is the address if you want to cut and paste:

    http://www.jw.org/index.html?option=QrYQCsVrGZNT

    I love it!

    Snoozy

  • thetrueone
    thetrueone

    Thanks Snoozy, have looked it up and what I get out of that is the WTS. is trying to discourage associating with

    people who were once JWS and have left to move on to another religion or whatever. Doesn't matter if

    that person is DF , DA, or inactive. They are trying to break apart families so to keep their flock intact and under

    their control. What a lovely cult, first they control people by instilling fear into their hearts and minds to cull them in,

    then if anyone should wake up to this disingenuous scheme and self voluntarily leave they mark them as evil and bad

    association.

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    "15 Do we share Jesus’ view of those who
    have become set in their lawless course?We
    need to give thought to these questions:
    ‘Would I choose to associate regularly with
    someone who has been disfellowshipped
    or who has disassociated himself from the
    Christian congregation? What if that one
    is a close relative who no longer lives at
    home?’ Such a situation can be a real test of
    our love of righteousness and of our loyalty
    to God

    I am sure the previous paragraphs tried to sell readers that Jesus avoided association with disfellowshipped ones while ignoring the fact that JESUS WAS DISFELLOWSHIPPED AND KILLED by self-righteous religious leaders. You really have to NOT THINK AT ALL in order to swallow this crap.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit