I find your article overall well worded but a title with the word psychological I expected a bit more than than what some forms of prejudice are and biblical contra arguments. This deserves current peer review articles of sociology and social psychology on the reprecussions of alienation. The word unchristian to me is nonsensical because this form of prejudice scoop is among many beliefs and values and not just general chrisitianity, it also asserts that christians do not implement psychological torture ignoring that any religion using their deity to shield their prejudice towards others by definition implements psychological turtore.
New article - SHUNNING: UNCHRISTIAN PSYCHOLOGICAL TORTURE
by EdenOne 27 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
adamah
Eden said-
I'm not sure about the pertinence of your comment, especially given the fact that I clearly make mention of the gnostic docetics as being the targets of John's remarks about the "antichrists". May I ask you if you've read the article?
I read it, but you're seemingly willing to overlook actual early Christian history and still claim such practices are "Unchristian", as if you planning to use the "no true Scotsman" defense (i.e. claiming they weren't truly Xians)? Are you're arguing that shunning is less-harmful than say, burning gnostic heretics at the stake? Such efforts were successful, since the early Xian church effectively squashed such heterodoxical beliefs out of existence by killing the adherents. That far exceeds "psychological torture".
BTW, citing Jesus associating with tax collectors is silly: such people weren't baptized members, but potential recruits.
OF COURSE he associated with them, as he was trying to recruit them. JWs do that, as well, as the testimony of a eg crack-addicted junkie who cleaned up their act and got baptized is a heart-warming story for a DC. If such a person were baptized and fell back into their old ways, though, they'd be DFed.
Adam
-
EdenOne
paranoia agent: This deserves current peer review articles of sociology and social psychology on the reprecussions of alienation.
Agreed, it deserved an academic study on sociology and psychology disciplines. But this is a religion forum, so ....
Eden
-
braincleaned
Huh... according to your article, I am an antichrist, since I deny him being more than a normal man — not even sure he really existed.
Oh well... -
EdenOne
Adamah:
I don't follow your logic, really. This is taken from the article (Conclusion):
No one nowadays can make a verifiable claim to possess equal authority as that of the apostles who interacted directly with Jesus Christ. Therefore, no one has the authority to modify or reverse what was written by the apostles or taught by Jesus, unless Jesus himself would unequivocally change his teachings. True, post-apostolic Christians often failed to show mercy towards those who departed from orthodox, dominant mainstream Christianity, but that doesn't negate the validity of the Scriptures. Modern Christians aren't bound by the mistakes of past Christians. They respond to Christ and God alone. As wisely put by Fulton J. Sheen: "Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles ... Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons. Tolerance applies to the erring; intolerance, to the error".
Perhaps this addresses your concern?
Yes, shunning isn't the same as stoning or burning someone, but it's excessively damaging and unconsistent with the teachings of Christ. Furthermore, I can't find in the apostolic writings anything that supports such treatment either. Later Christian writers, perhaps, but not the apostles.
Eden
-
EdenOne
braincleaned : I am an antichrist, since I deny him being more than a normal man
According to the apostle John that's exactly what you are, considering what you've believed before. You might as well come to terms with that notion, nothing esoteric or apocalyptic about it.
Eden
-
steve2
Thanks EdenOne. You da man! I like what you have done. A comprehensive account, well written and researched.
I think it is a mark of a civilizing world that "shunning" receives a lot more press than it did in years past. Adam makes a pertinent reference to the atrocities of earlier centuries carried out by "true" Christians against "heretics. Oh, yes, no question: I'd rather be shunned than hunted down and burned at the stake - but if I have to use polar opposites to adjust my thinking to current reality, I'd have to say I would rather not be shunned at all thank you very much! My ancestors led short and brutish lives and they would surely view my daily bleatings as those of an indulged princeling.
A line of reasoning that says, "You don't know what real hardship is..." is probably literally correct but lacks a certain empathy for current pain that can work wonders for recovery.
That said, there is persuasive evidence that ex-pharisee converted-to-apostledom, Paul, was the "right" man to introduce the notion of "avoiding" brothers who did not practise what they preached. To slam the JW organization for fine-tuning "avoidance" is inadvertently to slam the shadow of the pharisees which oozes through the Pauline letters to the congregations of the day. I'd like to think if Paul were around today, I'd invite the congregations to shun him first!
-
braincleaned
// According to the apostle John that's exactly what you are, considering what you've believed before. You might as well come to terms with that notion, nothing esoteric or apocalyptic about it.//
I agree. Even a bit satisfied to be honest! :D -
adamah
Eden said-
I don't follow your logic, really. This is taken from the article (Conclusion):
No one nowadays can make a verifiable claim to possess equal authority as that of the apostles who interacted directly with Jesus Christ. Therefore, no one has the authority to modify or reverse what was written by the apostles or taught by Jesus, unless Jesus himself would unequivocally change his teachings. True, post-apostolic Christians often failed to show mercy towards those who departed from orthodox, dominant mainstream Christianity, but that doesn't negate the validity of the Scriptures. Modern Christians aren't bound by the mistakes of past Christians. They respond to Christ and God alone. As wisely put by Fulton J. Sheen: "Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles ... Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons. Tolerance applies to the erring; intolerance, to the error".
Perhaps this addresses your concern?
Yes, and that's the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, since you excuse the post-apostolic examples of Xians who murderously undermined your claim of shunning being "unchristian" by killing heretics, a behavior which is FAR MORE aggregious. But if you're willing to make such excuses, why bother jumping thru the logical hoops to present the history, only to play the "No true Scotsman" fallacy card in the end?
Eden said- Yes, shunning isn't the same as stoning or burning someone, but it's excessively damaging and unconsistent with the teachings of Christ.
Jesus spoke out indirectly against shunning, but only if one is willing to rely on a few admittedly questionable assumptions of applying logic from the 'pericope of the adulteress':
http://awgue.weebly.com/would-jesus-shun.html
But the title of your article didn't claim that shunning was not in keeping with the teachings of Jesus, but declares it to be 'unchristian'. There's a HUGE difference in those two claims.
Eden said- Furthermore, I can't find in the apostolic writings anything that supports such treatment either. Later Christian writers, perhaps, but not the apostles.
You spend considerable time presenting the very evidence found in the NT, only to ignore it later, since that's the very scriptural basis used to justify shunning by groups like the JWs, needed to keep the congregation "clean". You cannot deny it's in the NT, and you left a few examples out, eg 2nd Peter 2 warns of false teachers:
False Teachers and Their Destruction
2 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, [a] putting them in chains of darkness [b] to be held for judgment; 5 if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; 6 if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless 8 (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)— 9 if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment. 10 This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh [c] and despise authority.
Bold and arrogant, they are not afraid to heap abuse on celestial beings; 11 yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not heap abuse on such beings when bringing judgment on them from [d] the Lord. 12 But these people blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like animals they too will perish.
13 They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you. [e] 14 With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood! 15 They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Bezer, [f] who loved the wages of wickedness. 16 But he was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey—an animal without speech—who spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet’s madness.
17 These people are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. 18 For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. 19 They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for “people are slaves to whatever has mastered them.” 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” [g] and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.”
Perhaps THAT'S the kind of "apostolic thinking" which later led to the killing of gnostic heretics, where some Xians were willing to take those polemics to heart and tell themselves that they were doing God's will by killing false teachers (who'd been compared to animals and demons, via the process of dehumanizing the victims)?
Regardless of whether the Bible said it or not, that kind of intolerant talk would be inexcusable today if expressed against ANY group, since it's clearly considered "hate speech" by today's standards. But since it's in the Bible, and is supposedly inspired by God, it's OK and gets a free pass? The Bible itself is immoral, since it relies on the fallacy of "might makes right" and permits cruelty and hatred in the name of God and Jesus. Hence shunning is actually as Xian of a practice as they get....
Adam
-
RayPublisher
Great job Eden. It's great to have another well written article to prove that the JWs and the WT Corp is a harmful cult-like group.
Don't worry about ones that like to pick things apart they are a dime a dozen lol. ;)