B.i.t.e. Me

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

I find it endlessly amazing, that Xtians will look at other groups and scream, "Cult!," but when it comes to their own social structure, they don't see it. What's stranger still, is that even the self proclaimed cult "experts" like Steve Hassan don't see the inherent hypocrisy in picking and choosing based on personal preference. If you take his B.I.T.E. model, and apply it to any of the mainstream religions, Xtianity included, they all come out as "dangerous, mind control cults." Only, he makes the unfortunate assumption that many Westerners make, that when you stop being in one of these "Cults," then it must be because you are now a Xtian. They assume Xtianity as the default position, when the natural state of being is Atheistic.

 

I think it would be interesting to go through the BITE model, and apply it to our own experiences. It's rather lengthy, but I think it would prove worthwhile. I think the easiest way to do this will be to cite the Biblical quotes that fundy Xtian's claim support their particular brand of morality, rather then the wishy washy "progressive" Xtian method of using the Bible as a buffet table.

 

http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecente...ticles/BITE.htm

 

Mind Control - The BITE Model

 

From chapter two of Releasing the Bonds: Empowering People to Think for Themselves*

 

*© 2000 by Steven Hassan; published by Freedom of Mind Press, Somerville MA

 

Destructive mind control can be understood in terms of four basic components, which form the acronym BITE:

 

I. Behavior Control

 

II. Information Control

 

III. Thought Control

 

IV. Emotional Control

 

It is important to understand that destructive mind control can be determined when the overall effect of these four components promotes dependency and obedience to some leader or cause. It is not necessary for every single item on the list to be present. Mind controlled cult members can live in their own apartments, have nine-to-five jobs, be married with children, and still be unable to think for themselves and act independently.

 

 

I. Behavior Control

 

1. Regulation of individual's physical reality

 

a. Where, how and with whom the member lives and associates with

b. What clothes, colors, hairstyles the person wears

c. What food the person eats, drinks, adopts, and rejects

d. How much sleep the person is able to have

e. Financial dependence

f. Little or no time spent on leisure, entertainment, vacations

 

2. Major time commitment required for indoctrination sessions and group rituals

 

3. Need to ask permission for major decisions

 

4. Need to report thoughts, feelings and activities to superiors

 

5. Rewards and punishments (behavior modification techniques- positive and negative).

 

6. Individualism discouraged; group think prevails

 

7. Rigid rules and regulations

 

8. Need for obedience and dependency

II. Information Control

 

1. Use of deception

 

a. Deliberately holding back information

b. Distorting information to make it acceptable

c. Outright lying

 

2. Access to non-cult sources of information minimized or discouraged

 

a. Books, articles, newspapers, magazines, TV, radio

b. Critical information

c. Former members

d. Keep members so busy they don't have time to think

 

3. Compartmentalization of information; Outsider vs. Insider doctrines

 

a. Information is not freely accessible

b. Information varies at different levels and missions within pyramid

c. Leadership decides who "needs to know" what

 

4. Spying on other members is encouraged

 

a. Pairing up with "buddy" system to monitor and control

b. Reporting deviant thoughts, feelings, and actions to leadership

 

5. Extensive use of cult generated information and propaganda

 

a. Newsletters, magazines, journals, audio tapes, videotapes, etc.

b. Misquotations, statements taken out of context from non-cult sources

 

6. Unethical use of confession

 

a. Information about "sins" used to abolish identity boundaries

b. Past "sins" used to manipulate and control; no forgiveness or absolution

 

III. Thought Control

 

1. Need to internalize the group's doctrine as "Truth"

 

a. Map = Reality

b. Black and White thinking

c. Good vs. evil

d. Us vs. them (inside vs. outside)

 

2. Adopt "loaded" language (characterized by "thought-terminating clichés"). Words are the tools we use to think with. These "special" words constrict rather than expand understanding. They function to reduce complexities of experience into trite, platitudinous "buzz words".

 

3. Only "good" and "proper" thoughts are encouraged.

 

4. Thought-stopping techniques (to shut down "reality testing" by stopping "negative" thoughts and allowing only "good" thoughts); rejection of rational analysis, critical thinking, constructive criticism.

 

a. Denial, rationalization, justification, wishful thinking

b. Chanting

c. Meditating

d. Praying

e. Speaking in "tongues"

f. Singing or humming

 

5. No critical questions about leader, doctrine, or policy seen as legitimate

 

6. No alternative belief systems viewed as legitimate, good, or useful

IV. Emotional Control

 

1. Manipulate and narrow the range of a person's feelings.

 

2. Make the person feel like if there are ever any problems it is always their fault, never the leader's or the group's.

 

3. Excessive use of guilt

 

a. Identity guilt

 

1. Who you are (not living up to your potential)

2. Your family

3. Your past

4. Your affiliations

5. Your thoughts, feelings, actions

 

b. Social guilt

c. Historical guilt

 

4. Excessive use of fear

 

a. Fear of thinking independently

b. Fear of the "outside" world

c. Fear of enemies

d. Fear of losing one's "salvation"

e. Fear of leaving the group or being shunned by group

f. Fear of disapproval

 

5. Extremes of emotional highs and lows.

 

6. Ritual and often public confession of "sins".

 

7. Phobia indoctrination : programming of irrational fears of ever leaving the group or even questioning the leader's authority. The person under mind control cannot visualize a positive, fulfilled future without being in the group.

 

a. No happiness or fulfillment "outside"of the group

b. Terrible consequences will take place if you leave: "hell"; "demon possession"; "incurable diseases"; "accidents"; "suicide"; "insanity"; "10,000 reincarnations"; etc.

c. Shunning of leave takers. Fear of being rejected by friends, peers, and family.

d. Never a legitimate reason to leave. From the group's perspective, people who leave are: "weak;" "undisciplined;" "unspiritual;" "worldly;" "brainwashed by family, counselors;" seduced by money, sex, rock and roll.

[Amethyst]

Excellent points!

 

Yes, most Christians get offended if you use the four-letter c word referring to their religion. Granted, some versions of Christianity are more harmful than others. But it really is a cult.

[Vomit Comet]

To me, the difference between a "religion" and a "cult" is a matter of degree. In classical times the concept of "cult" didn't have such a negative connotation: it was a particular sect, highly esoteric and mystical, whose members were wholly devoted to a particular god or goddess. Their degree of involvement, commitment, etc., was markedly more acute than it would have been for the average Greek or Roman. Therefore, Jim Jones' outfit was much more easily classified as a "cult" than some mega-church where half the people there are just sitting on their ass wanting to be entertained.

[woodsmoke]

Quoted from here (#27):

 

In response to the question “what is the difference between a religion and a cult?” scholars of religion sometimes respond with answers such as “about 100 years” or “a religion is a cult with political influence.” “[M]ost of the world religions, full of compromise as they have become, began fanatically and usually in identification with a single people before they went international and ecumenical.” Martin E. Marty, Introduction to Religion, Ethnicity, and Self-Identity: Nations in Turmoil 15 (Martin E. Marty & R. Scott Appleby eds., 1997).

[Eponymic]

I believe there also is still a stigma that a "cult" is a small group.

I don't think many people believe or realize that cults aren't limited by size.

A cult can be the biggest religion in the world or three people meeting in their mamas basement.

[PaulQ]

It's not just a cult, it's a blood cult. Some Christians may actually recognize this when you ask them what they're supposed to be drinking during holy communion, but figure since it's not really blood that they're drinking, it's okay.

 

Of course, we ex-Christians all know what that grape juice or red wine is supposed to represent, and we ought not allow the devout believers forget it.

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

I really do intend to go through these as a series. Any feed back would be appreciated. Firstly, Behavioral Control. Before I go through all of these, I acknowledge that a lot of my citations come from the OT. I do this because, as we are all aware, modern day progressive Xtians simply choose to ignore or rationalize the OT. I refuse to allow them to ignore it. These things are in the Bible, and aren't going anywhere. Buffet Xtians may pick and choose some of these things in the OT, such as the idea of their God hating divorce, but ignore admonishments to avoid shrimp.

 

I. Behavior Control

 

1. Regulation of individual's physical reality

 

a. Where, how and with whom the member lives and associates with

b. What clothes, colors, hairstyles the person wears

c. What food the person eats, drinks, adopts, and rejects

d. How much sleep the person is able to have

e. Financial dependence

f. Little or no time spent on leisure, entertainment, vacations

A Where, how, and with whom the member lives and associates with

Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

"I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be My people."

Therefore

"Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you whall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty."

---2 Cor 6:14-18

 

B What clothes, colors, hairstyles the person wears

A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all who do are an abomination to the Lord your God.

Deut 22:5

You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together. You shall make tassels of the four corners of the clothing with which you cover yourself.

Deut 22:11-12

 

Ok, so I'm having a hard time with this one. It's not that the information isn't there, but there are so many old testament laws, and frankly, I've read 'em already, and I don't feel like it. So if you guys can think of any off the top of your head, I'll add them. I know there are a lot more then this.

 

C What food the person eats, drinks, adopts or rejects

Speak to the children of Israel, saying, 'These are the animals which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth.

Lev 11:2

 

Chapter 11 goes on to discuss what animals are and are not fit for consumption, based upon their cleanliness. I won't quote the whole thing here.

Additionally, all churches have their own interpretations of what is and is not acceptable. They base their rules off of the idea that the body is a temple of God, and is to be kept clean. You may find many Xtians who think that smoking, drinking alcohol, or eating meat is against God's will for their life. While some of these things may be subjective, depending upon the individuals interpretation, much of it depends upon the general consensus of the religious right.

 

D How much sleep the person is able to have

 

In my church, you were expected to "Run longer, sleep less." The justification for that statement comes from the following verses, as well as from the film Iron Will. Apparently we were also required to race Huskies and live off of fruit cake.

 

He gives strength to the fainting; for the weak he makes vigor abound. Though young men faint and grow weary, and youths stagger and fall, they that hope in the LORD will renew their strength, they will soar as with eagles' wings; They will run and not grow weary, walk and not grow faint.

--Isiah 40:29-31

 

E Financial Dependence

 

I don't even feel the need to cite any verses for this one. I'll just toss some phrases out there I'm sure we're all familiar with.

 

Financial Peace University

Tithing

Church Assistance

Donations

 

Basically, it begins with tithing. Then, the church begins asking for additional donations. When the family can not afford to pay their bills, they receive church assistance, and then are put through financial counseling. The process repeats itself the next time the group begins asking for donation commitments.

 

F Little or no time spent on leisure, entertainment, vacations

 

Whole Sundays given up to church activities. Summers, weeks, months, even lifetimes given over to "the ministry." Evenings dedicated to Bible Studies, mornings dedicated to prayer. When entertainment is sought out, it is usually with the church group, and is often centered around a ministry.

 

2. Major time commitment required for indoctrination sessions and group rituals

 

3. Need to ask permission for major decisions

 

4. Need to report thoughts, feelings and activities to superiors

 

5. Rewards and punishments (behavior modification techniques- positive and negative).

 

6. Individualism discouraged; group think prevails

 

7. Rigid rules and regulations

 

8. Need for obedience and dependency

2. Major time commitment required for indoctrination sessions and group rituals

Churches require potential members to attend seminars, or to attend their church for a certain amount of time. There are also prayer circles (group rituals) which meet regularly, Sunday school classes, and independent Bible Study.

 

3. Need to ask permission for major decisions

Often times, this is couched in comfortably as "counseling," but everyone knows, if you make major life decisions without the "counseling," then things will go wrong. Inversely, if you accept the counseling, and things still go wrong, it was your fault for misinterpreting the signs given to you by God.

 

Counseling usually covers such areas as marriage, finances, employment, and education.

 

4. Need to report thoughts, feelings and activities to superiors

Xtians will tell you that you need only report your mistakes and/or thought crimes to God, but you are also told to repent for the more abhorrent of sins, such as homosexual thoughts or smoking the reefer. Repentance usually entails more spiritual counseling. In some cases, such as infidelity, your sins may be related in detail to the congregation prior to your shunning.

Accountability partners are also used to keep members in check, reporting their misdeeds to each other, knowing that if they did something bad enough, their partner could report it to church authorities.

 

5. Rewards and punishments (behavior modification techniques- positive and negative).

Heaven and Hell. There are also temporal rewards and punishments. Subscribing to Xtian philosophy is rewarded with positive reinforcement, while deviation from that course is met with shunning behavior.

 

6. Individualism discouraged; group think prevails

Difficult questions are labeled as having a "hard heart," or a "crisis of faith." Parroting verses and buzz words means a member is "Strong in the Lord" or has a "Teachable Spirit."

 

7. Rigid Rules and Regulations

The specifics depend on your particular brand of Xtianity, but will likely include:

Clothing Deemed Acceptable

Tithing

Extreme Time Commitments

Expectations Insinuated By Group Behavior

[Guest QuidEstCaritas?]

I find it endlessly amazing, that Xtians will look at other groups and scream, "Cult!," but when it comes to their own social structure, they don't see it. What's stranger still, is that even the self proclaimed cult "experts" like Steve Hassan don't see the inherent hypocrisy in picking and choosing based on personal preference. If you take his B.I.T.E. model, and apply it to any of the mainstream religions, Xtianity included, they all come out as "dangerous, mind control cults." Only, he makes the unfortunate assumption that many Westerners make, that when you stop being in one of these "Cults," then it must be because you are now a Xtian. They assume Xtianity as the default position, when the natural state of being is Atheistic.

 

I think it would be interesting to go through the BITE model, and apply it to our own experiences. It's rather lengthy, but I think it would prove worthwhile. I think the easiest way to do this will be to cite the Biblical quotes that fundy Xtian's claim support their particular brand of morality, rather then the wishy washy "progressive" Xtian method of using the Bible as a buffet table.

 

http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecente...ticles/BITE.htm

 

Steve Hassan is a Jew. Just thought I would point that out to you.

 

Btw I was in a cult, I am an atheistic agnostic (weak atheist), and I can tell you there is far more control in a cult run by one person than in your average mainstream religion (and yes that would include most fundamentalist experiences). How do I know this? It is because I have had experience with liberal, charismatic, conservative, traditionalist, and traditionalist cultic expressions of Catholicism. So I know what I am talking about. Also, I don't agree with your contention that somehow liberals are "cherry picking" the Bible more than conservatives. Conservatives cherry pick from the OT and liberals cherry pick from the NT, that's the facts of life as I see them when it comes to retarded religion. There is no "cafeteria-free-tell-it-like-it-is" version of Christianity. That's just a mindgame that conservative Christians use to claim moral superiority, when the reality is that they just cherry pick different things than the liberals.

 

I can tell you firsthand. Fundamentalism can approach the level of control found in cults, that is true, but in the end cults are usually much smaller and are cults of personality. I can be a fundamentalist and as long as I attend the right Southern Baptist Church and hear the right message I am doing A-Ok. In a cult the leader has his own message and his own following. The cult I got out of was condemned by the official Brazilian Nation Council of Catholic Bishops in 1985 as a cult of personality. If it was merely a fundamentalist movement then it wouldn't have received such a condemnation. Instead it was (and still is), a cult centering around one guy.

 

I think it is more precise and accurate to say that some of what Steve Hassan speaks of comes into play in all experiences of fundamentalism, and in some cases perhaps most of those things come into play. There is a difference to the degree in which some of those things are in play if one compares cults to fundamentalism, and I think that is perhaps something you might not understand. Also, the fact that retarded Evangelicals seek to label fundamentalist Jehovah Witnesses, along with Mormons and Seventh Day Adventists as a cult, is disengenuous and misguided. These are not cults. They are, as you have probably already realized, only competition to the evangelicals' own fundamentalist experience.

 

I was exit counseled too btw, I spent a year exit counseled by two well meaning Evangelical Christian exit counselors. I can tell you that had my group run such a facility, I might very well have come out believing I was a counter revolutionary and that it was my mission to fight the revolution. See my testimony entitled "Ex-Member of Something or Another: Why Cults suck and Fundy Exit Counselors are also dishonest". My entire story is there, with videos showing the group and everything. It was a bizzare group I was in, and if you watch those videos I posted in my testimony you can see for yourself how fucked up and weird it was. Like something out of the Davinci code.

 

Also, I would like to add that there are people that come out of the exit counseling movement that are atheists and agnostics, and I am not the only one....

This phenomenon of deconversion is understood by people such as Steve Hassan, even if he and others want to hold onto their childish notions that somehow "cults" are coercive in a bad way and that mainstream religion is somehow not (there is an unfortunate tendency of this in the exit counseling movement and it is sad). In any case I don't keep contact with the exit counselors anymore, I live my own life and will be attending college in four days (fulltime). I am grateful for what they did in rehabilitating me using Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, that enabled me to get over the Trauma in a large way, but in the end I have moved on. Such is as it should be.

 

Trimmed for post length. No need to quote entire article with link right there. -Woody

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

Christianity is a cult of personality, centered around Christ. My point is, the basis for it being a dangerous, mind control cult is there in the Bible, but Christians ignore it. The ones who don't ignore it, employ the strict, harsh measures mentioned in the Bible. I wasn't aware Hassan was Jewish. I suppose his time in the Moonies confused me. Still, I think it's a trap the greater world falls into. The assumption that if it's mainstream, it's not a cult. By definition, every religion is a cult. To say that some are worse by a matter of degrees, well, that depends on how deeply you bought into it. I was a fundy Xtian, and i was a Mormon, so I've had experience in both mainstream groups and groups classified as cults. You know the difference I saw? The degree of political influence. That's pretty much it.

[Guest QuidEstCaritas?]

Christianity is a cult of personality, centered around Christ. My point is, the basis for it being a dangerous, mind control cult is there in the Bible, but Christians ignore it. The ones who don't ignore it, employ the strict, harsh measures mentioned in the Bible. I wasn't aware Hassan was Jewish. I suppose his time in the Moonies confused me. Still, I think it's a trap the greater world falls into. The assumption that if it's mainstream, it's not a cult. By definition, every religion is a cult. To say that some are worse by a matter of degrees, well, that depends on how deeply you bought into it. I was a fundy Xtian, and i was a Mormon, so I've had experience in both mainstream groups and groups classified as cults. You know the difference I saw? The degree of political influence. That's pretty much it.

 

Would you consider a "liberal's" X-tianity to be as controlling and traumatizing as your own? Especially seeing the testimony here of people who are Ex-Christian that came from admittedly liberal backgrounds and never felt seriously trapped by their beliefs? People who eventually just sort of dropped them and saw them as irrational? I think it would be dishonest of you to ignore their own testimony in regards how pressured they felt to believe. Generally speaking people who have only experienced liberal versions of Religion do not grow up in traumatic situations that are a direct cause of that belief system. That is because their parents take it easy on them and their friends won't necessarily denounce them completely if they drop their religion. They might not approve, but that is a far cry from what others who come from a fundamentalist expression of X-tianity or Mormonism would experience, on the average.

 

Just as fundamentalism produces more pressure and coercion in interpersonal relationships than liberalism does (hence the testimony of liberals here who mostly never suffered from traumatic experiences directly relating to their religion), the same thing can be said of cults in regards fundamentalism. It's not just about raw political influence. In any mainstream religion you have a power structure (priesthood), when one guy is running the show (and I mean a guy that is actually alive), the distribution of power is much less defined and authority ultimately resides in the hand of only one individual in such a manner that he can literally micromanage his group. Now you might say that the Pope does the same thing, but I would beg to differ that the Pope does. He might do it "in general" but he doesn't do it specifically and go into painstaking detail. The Pope doesn't go into diatribes when one of the members of the Catholic Church decides to wear jeans. The Pope might speak "in general" about "the need for modesty", but that is a far cry from people who come from cults where the leader does go into painstaking detail and even beyond just that people should wear skirts if they are women. He will even iron it down to what kind of "look" suits him and is allowed.

 

It's like the difference between the LDS and the FLDS. In the FLDS, Jeffs was running the show. In the LDS there is a distribution of power and as a result, less micromanagement (also taking into account our secular society).

 

My opinion is that if it's not mainstream it's a sect. If it's mainstream it's a religion. If it is aiming for total control in every last area right down to the way you part your hair, then it's a cult. Where I differ is I don't share the belief that religion is more respectable than a cult because it's less coercive (and on the average it is less coercive). I think mainstream religion IS coercive, and that while liberals might not be as coercive in the way they choose to express their religion versus say fundamentalists, that they are still wrong.

 

On a continuum of coercion this is how I would rank things:

 

1. Liberal

2. Moderate

3. Conservative

4. Traditionalist

5. Cultist

 

Cults are radical zealots of the worst sort. I know in your line of thinking there is no "worst sort", only political differences relating to clout, but in my line of thinking there is definitely a "worst sort".

I would agree that religion in general exercises a lesser coercive intensive form of thought reform in general. I just wanted to point out the differences, as the hair splitting IS important because it has real psychological impacts (again liberal upbringing versus conservative upbringing is the best example). Don't get me wrong, all those categories can be applied to X-tianity, just don't be surprised if when you go through with this you come to the realization that the manipulation isn't as extensive in liberalism versus conservativism or in conservativism vs cultism (qualitatively and quantitatively).

I have heard liberals arguing that the "real problem" is fundamentalism, just as I have heard exit counselors argue that the "real problem" is cultism, and just as I have heard the atheists argue that the "real problem" is religion in general. I have also heard cultists argue that the "real problem" is the cult witch hunt and the "ridiculous theories" of mind control by paranoid individuals in mainstream religion or elsewhere who don't want to respect the "freedom" of new religious movements. Finally I have heard from "moderate" fence sitters that the "real problem" is "extremism", and I have heard from traditionalists that the "real problem" is modernism . I don't agree with any of those assessments, and I never will.

[Amethyst]

It is all a cult. To say one part of it is a cult and another part isn't is absurd. Yes, some cults are more harmful and abusive than other cults. But it doesn't mean the less harmful cults are not, in fact, cults.

 

This is not meant to lessen anyone's experience. But we need to be able to say that yes, Christianity is a cult and yes, we left it. It is part of the healing process.

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

That's why I think we've had a misstep here. I'm not really disagreeing with you, but I'm making a different point entirely. My point is, Biblical, traditional Xtianity is a cult, and there's not really a way around that. There may be different degrees these days, but there may also be different degrees of Scientology someday. Does that make their beliefs anymore rational? Anymore based on fact? At the end of the day, they're still based on the cult of personality that is Xitianity. That's all I'm sayin'. Albeit, with some anger, but I think we're all entitled to a little bit of anger here.

 

I have as much a problem with moderates as I do with fundamentalists because they all get their ideas from the same book. And, to quote Richard Dawkins, "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

It is all a cult.

 

To say one part of it is a cult and another part isn't is absurd.

 

Yes, some cults are more harmful and abusive than other cults.

 

But it doesn't mean the less harmful cults are not, in fact, cults.

 

I agree with you completely.

 

I say, if it's ok for some people, then it's ok for everyone. If it's not ok for someone, then it's not ok for anyone. And to say that, based on the shiny veneer, moderate Xitianity is not dangerous, is to deny the negative experiences people have in those churches. A pig is still a pig, after all.

[Neon Genesis]

I agree with you completely.

 

I say, if it's ok for some people, then it's ok for everyone. If it's not ok for someone, then it's not ok for anyone. And to say that, based on the shiny veneer, moderate Xitianity is not dangerous, is to deny the negative experiences people have in those churches. A pig is still a pig, after all.

How so? That's like saying if sex isn't ok for some people, then sex isn't ok for anyone, so all sex is dangerous, even if they're having safe sex and not hurting anyone and minding their own business.

[PaulQ]

cult

   /kʌlt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kuhlt] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

 

Christianity fits the first definition. 'Nuff said.

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

All I'm saying is, the label shouldn't be so exclusionary. What I meant was, if the cult label can be applied to some people, then it should be applied to all of them. It's the definition of the word cult. If they want to be a member of the cult, ok, but call what it is. It would be like saying, those people have sex, but those homosexuals in the corner, they have sin.

[agnosticator]

That's why I think we've had a misstep here. I'm not really disagreeing with you, but I'm making a different point entirely. My point is, Biblical, traditional Xtianity is a cult, and there's not really a way around that. There may be different degrees these days, but there may also be different degrees of Scientology someday.

 

I think both Rabidtreeweasel and QuidEstCaritas? have valid points as to what cults are.

 

Quid. is using the modernday definition and Rabid is using the bible itself as the defining standard. I see the bible, especially the new testament as being a blueprint for the cults.

[Neon Genesis]

Sorry, I misread the previous post by the opening starter when I made this post. Please ignore it.

[Guest QuidEstCaritas?]

It is all a cult. To say one part of it is a cult and another part isn't is absurd. Yes, some cults are more harmful and abusive than other cults. But it doesn't mean the less harmful cults are not, in fact, cults.

 

This is not meant to lessen anyone's experience. But we need to be able to say that yes, Christianity is a cult and yes, we left it. It is part of the healing process.

 

I hope you understand I am not using the term "cult" in the same sense you are. I am using it in a substantially different way.

If you want to call X-tianity a cult, then that is fine with me, I won't deny anyone's sense of grieving here. However, by the same token I will not sit silent and let people equate the level of coercion they had in a liberal, moderate, or conservative upbringing, with the level of coercion I experienced in my group and just sit by and let that happen. I hope you can understand this. For instance, while you could correctly argue that liberal Islam and conservative Islam are both forms of the same cult, if I were an ex-Sulafi Jihadist and you and I both used to be Islamic, then I wouldn't be inclined to agree that your experience was as totalistic and extremely microcosmic as my own. We would have to agree to disagree.

 

I am not using the same dictionary definition of a cult.

 

You are using this definition:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult

 

QUOTE:

cult

   /kʌlt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kuhlt] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

END QUOTE

 

And I am operating out of this definition:

 

6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

 

 

Religious cults in the sense you are using do plenty of damage, and I wouldn't dream of arguing otherwise. Sometimes the damage is inflicted on such a massive scale within a person's psyche, that and ordinary person can never really recover from it, (how many serial killers came from fundy conservative upbringings or how many rapes occurred because the woman couldn't get away from the man due to marriage dogma?). Religious cults can also lead to a macrocosmic version of a "cult" in the sense that I am using it in, as when Hitler took power in Germany.

[Guest QuidEstCaritas?]

All I'm saying is, the label shouldn't be so exclusionary. What I meant was, if the cult label can be applied to some people, then it should be applied to all of them. It's the definition of the word cult. If they want to be a member of the cult, ok, but call what it is. It would be like saying, those people have sex, but those homosexuals in the corner, they have sin.

 

 

Why shouldn't it be so exclusionary? Because you say so? Because it's your own personal fiat? Because you want to ignore the real life trauma that people had when they got caught up in some nightmare that was far more closed off than your own? So tell me then, do you think those "cherry picking" liberals were more committed to their cause than you were? Do you honestly think they suffered more in their cult than yours, and just happen to get on here and talk about their mild upbringing and mild religious experience because they haven't come out of the closet with the severe trauma they endured? Do they come on here and say their religious upbringing wasn't really all that harsh and that they quit the cult of X-tianity, but not because of severe religious coercion, but just because it didn't make sense one day? Or perhaps you ACTUALLY went through some shit they didn't? Perhaps you ACTUALLY experienced MORE coercion than they did because your particular cult's expression was far more intense and locked down than there's was? Would you be so bold as to say that their mild religious experience was anything close to the lockdown you experienced as a fundamentalist Mormon? Would you? Because you see, you are denying my ability to speak out and demarcate differences in my experience and the cruelty I went through by trying to somehow say "It's all just fucked up" as if me saying what I went through was MORE closed off is somehow denying other people the ability to heal.

 

I am sorry buddy, but in war you have people who survive in warzones and you have Prisoners of War. The first suffer repeated trauma and the second suffer MASSIVE trauma.

 

Call it a cult, I don't care. I'll call my experience "nothing" and let you have what you really want.

[Amethyst]

It is all a cult. To say one part of it is a cult and another part isn't is absurd. Yes, some cults are more harmful and abusive than other cults. But it doesn't mean the less harmful cults are not, in fact, cults.

 

This is not meant to lessen anyone's experience. But we need to be able to say that yes, Christianity is a cult and yes, we left it. It is part of the healing process.

 

I hope you understand I am not using the term "cult" in the same sense you are. I am using it in a substantially different way.

If you want to call X-tianity a cult, then that is fine with me, I won't deny anyone's sense of grieving here. However, by the same token I will not sit silent and let people equate the level of coercion they had in a liberal, moderate, or conservative upbringing, with the level of coercion I experienced in my group and just sit by and let that happen. I hope you can understand this. For instance, while you could correctly argue that liberal Islam and conservative Islam are both forms of the same cult, if I were an ex-Sulafi Jihadist and you and I both used to be Islamic, then I wouldn't be inclined to agree that your experience was as totalistic and extremely microcosmic as my own. We would have to agree to disagree.

 

No, I am using the definition, any religious group that cannot prove beyond a doubt it's claims are true is a cult. Which means ALL religious groups are cults. This is, by the way, the Atheistic definition of a cult.

 

Again. This is not meant to lessen anyone's personal experience, but if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck. Calling it a rose just for the sake of political correctness strikes me as silly.

[Guest Rabidtreeweasel]

The hostility is really uncalled for. I'm not clear cut on what you're so angry about? I think you're misreading my statements, and that's fine. If you don't like the thread, feel free to ignore it. You can demarcate your experiences however you like, I'm just using a different standard then you are. I find the dictionary definition to hold less gray areas, and to be more universally applicable. I don't think anyone should be lied to, ever, for any reason. I think it's wrong. I'm not stifling your right to say anything. We can disagree, it's fine. I'm not calling your experience nothing, I'm not labeling others experiences. The end point is, religion is dangerous. Religious dogma is dangerous. There's no need to start a shouting match. Obviously, it's a touchy subject, or we wouldn't all be here. We won't all agree on everything. A friend of mine says, trying to get atheists to agree on anything is like herding cats. Some things, we'll just have to agree to disagree on.

[Amethyst]

Religious cults in the sense you are using do plenty of damage, and I wouldn't dream of arguing otherwise. Sometimes the damage is inflicted on such a massive scale within a person's psyche, that and ordinary person can never really recover from it, (how many serial killers came from fundy conservative upbringings or how many rapes occurred because the woman couldn't get away from the man due to marriage dogma?). Religious cults can also lead to a macrocosmic version of a "cult" in the sense that I am using it in, as when Hitler took power in Germany.

 

Yes they do.

 

The problem is also that many small children are brought up in a mindset that promotes beliefs which are false, and rewards the child for believing in false things and punishes the child for believing in true things. Not all children eventually deconvert, many wind up believing in these things until they die of old age.

 

This is very sad.

[Amethyst]

Would you consider a "liberal's" X-tianity to be as controlling and traumatizing as your own? Especially seeing the testimony here of people who are Ex-Christian that came from admittedly liberal backgrounds and never felt seriously trapped by their beliefs? People who eventually just sort of dropped them and saw them as irrational? I think it would be dishonest of you to ignore their own testimony in regards how pressured they felt to believe. Generally speaking people who have only experienced liberal versions of Religion do not grow up in traumatic situations that are a direct cause of that belief system. That is because their parents take it easy on them and their friends won't necessarily denounce them completely if they drop their religion. They might not approve, but that is a far cry from what others who come from a fundamentalist expression of X-tianity or Mormonism would experience, on the average.

 

I personally would consider any "liberal" religion to also be a cult. Granted, it's a watered-down version of more harmful ones, however it is still a cult because they cannot prove their religious claims to be true. Liberal churches are also the last stop on the road to deconversion for many who grew up in stricter versions of religion, and seeing the liberal church finally opens their eyes to the stupidity that is organized religion. I grew up in an ultra-conservative Missouri Synod Lutheran church and the last church I attended regularly was a United Church of Christ one. They're polar opposites as far as political beliefs go. It was while going to the liberal church where I finally realized how stupid cherry picking is.

 

Again, this is NOT to lessen anyone's personal experience. But...calling less harmful cults "not cults" because they didn't apply pressure tactics like fundamentalist churches do, is like calling a duck a rose because of political correctness.

 

Of course, Christianity in its entirety is a cult. It's a cult that has gotten too big for its britches. The fact that there are liberal splinter groups is because people are trying to regain their sense of sanity, of not believing in things like hating gay people just because a book says so or believing literally that the world is only 6,000 years old (or whatever the magic ultra-creationist number is). Somewhere along the way, they have realized how insane fundamentalist religion is. This is a good thing, but the logical second step is to realize how insane it ALL is.

[Guest QuidEstCaritas?]

Would you consider a "liberal's" X-tianity to be as controlling and traumatizing as your own? Especially seeing the testimony here of people who are Ex-Christian that came from admittedly liberal backgrounds and never felt seriously trapped by their beliefs? People who eventually just sort of dropped them and saw them as irrational? I think it would be dishonest of you to ignore their own testimony in regards how pressured they felt to believe. Generally speaking people who have only experienced liberal versions of Religion do not grow up in traumatic situations that are a direct cause of that belief system. That is because their parents take it easy on them and their friends won't necessarily denounce them completely if they drop their religion. They might not approve, but that is a far cry from what others who come from a fundamentalist expression of X-tianity or Mormonism would experience, on the average.

 

I personally would consider any "liberal" religion to also be a cult. Granted, it's a watered-down version of more harmful ones, however it is still a cult because they cannot prove their religious claims to be true. Liberal churches are also the last stop on the road to deconversion for many who grew up in stricter versions of religion, and seeing the liberal church finally opens their eyes to the stupidity that is organized religion. I grew up in an ultra-conservative Missouri Synod Lutheran church and the last church I attended regularly was a United Church of Christ one. They're polar opposites as far as political beliefs go. It was while going to the liberal church where I finally realized how stupid cherry picking is.

 

Again, this is NOT to lessen anyone's personal experience. But...calling less harmful cults "not cults" because they didn't apply pressure tactics like fundamentalist churches do, is like calling a duck a rose because of political correctness.

 

Of course, Christianity in its entirety is a cult. It's a cult that has gotten too big for its britches. The fact that there are liberal splinter groups is because people are trying to regain their sense of sanity, of not believing in things like hating gay people just because a book says so or believing literally that the world is only 6,000 years old (or whatever the magic ultra-creationist number is). Somewhere along the way, they have realized how insane fundamentalist religion is. This is a good thing, but the logical second step is to realize how insane it ALL is.

 

 

Since I've gone through nothing I can't really comment on your experience except to say I am sorry you went through that, and I hope you recover.