1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI have listened to their claims, i have not studied them. Here is a piece of advice, unsolicited i know, about meddling in other peoples affairs,
So you [b]have examined their claims, then?[/b]
(1 Thessalonians 4:10, 11) .But we exhort you, brothers, to go on doing it in fuller measure, and to make it your aim to live quietly and to mind your own business.
whatever issues people have is their business. I try where possible to mind my own business. I exhort you to do the same.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAt the bottom of page 20 - far from "minding your own business" - you described - on a public forum - the testimonies of people (testimonies you claim to have not read or examined) as "disgruntled" and offering "distorted perspective". So you have made specific claims about people and about what they say about their experience, even though you refuse to read the testimonies in question.
whatever issues people have is their business. I try where possible to mind my own business. I exhort you to do the same.
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI once had a 'conversation' with an Australian Scientologist friend that was in many respects just like this one I've been having with you. She was conducting herself in almost exactly the same way as you have been conducting yourself here. She managed to get away from the Scientologists in the end but not without having to endure some bad experiences which, I am sure, the Scientologists would seek to dismiss in pretty much the same way as you always try to dismiss the testimonies of ex-JWs.
they are not me and i am not them. goodnight.
Originally posted by FMFI can understand them not wanting to except that there are errors in the teachings of the Watchtower Society, because of all the time and effort they have invested in carrying out those beliefs in their door-to-door ministry duties. It is somewhat sad to me that they refuse to accept Christ as the One worthy of worship; but you are in the same boat as they are in that department and you don't even accept Christ as your Savior, whereas they do, but not as God, but as an angel.
I once had a 'conversation' with an Australia Scientologist friend that was in many respects just like this one I've been having with you. She was conducting herself in almost exactly the same way as you have been conducting yourself here. She managed to get away from the Scientologists in the end but not without having to endure some bad experiences which, I am ...[text shortened]... o dismiss in pretty much the same way as you always try to dismiss the testimonies of ex-JWs.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsYou're missing my point. I am not talking here about the teachings of the Watchtower Society or the teachings of Scientology. What is under scrutiny is how members of the group approach and deal with the fact that there is testimony available from ex-members of the group that raises fundamental questions about the way the group conducts itself, and, to that extent, what is being discussed relates to the thread topic. That you and robbie disagree about Jesus, or that I do not share yours or robbie's beliefs, is not relevant here.
I can understand them not wanting to except that there are errors in the teachings of the Watchtower Society... blah blah
Originally posted by FMFI guess robbie is missing the point too. 😏
You're missing my point. I am not talking here about the teachings of the Watchtower Society or the teachings of Scientology. What is under scrutiny is how members of the group approach and deal with the fact that there is testimony available from ex-members of the group that raises fundamental questions about the way the group conducts itself, and, to that exte ...[text shortened]... disagree about Jesus, or that I do not share yours or robbie's beliefs, is not relevant here.
Originally posted by RJHindsI rather suspect that robbie is not "missing the point" so much as trying to dodge it. However, the way he has responded to the issues of what ex-members of a group say about their experience, what evidence they provide to back up their claims to have escaped from a "cult", and the way that remaining members of the group try to discredit or effectively ignore all this testimony, has rather neatly fitted in with the topic of this thread, I think.
I guess robbie is missing the point too. 😏
Classic definition ?
Leadership that tightly controls their "Sheeple" no dissent no disagreement specially in regards to what the leadership deems correct or right. No free thought or questioning allowed. Brainwashing is very common.
Scripted words or thoughts not allowed to express ideas in your own way.
Restriction of movement
Usually a charismatic leader ( not always ) aka Jim Jones for example or Applewhite Heaven's gate cult. Who in most cases demand worship in one form or another.
Usually an offshoot of some main religion but hold extreme or radical views sometimes with no rational reason.
Leaving or escaping group/cult frowned upon usually some form of punitive action is taken against one's who leave the group.
Manny