Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the title of the thread is definition of cult, if you have something to add please feel free otherwise if you have not the deportment nor manners to conduct yourself with a sense of propriety may i please ask that you post elsewhere, for you are contributing nothing to the topic.

I've also made several posts which directly address the OP and which you have chosen to ignore.

Originally posted by FMF
Talking of the thread being on course or off course. I thought that this post... [b]"Knowing that there are many religions out there that are called a cult, why do you zero in on the Witnesses? Is there some special hate you have for them or do you hate others also? Why do you never mention the other ones?" [to be found on page 3] was a rather blatant attempt to derail and personalize this thread, don't you agree?[/b]

this is irrelevant to the topic at hand, if you have not the manners nor the deportment to conduct your self with a sense of decency with regard to the thread and the topic I would be very much pleased if you went elsewhere, again, the title of the thread is , definition of a cult, if you have nothing to add to that, then why are you posting in this thread? There are plenty of other threads where you can take cheap shots at others.

Originally posted by divegeester
I've also made several posts which directly address the OP and which you have chosen to ignore.

Ah, now there's the rub.

Originally posted by divegeester
I've also made several posts which directly address the OP and which you have chosen to ignore.

I did not choose to ignore them, i read them, i simply had nothing to say in reply, again, the thread is not about you, the title is, definition of a cult.

Originally posted by FMF
Ah, now there's the rub.

no its not about any rub, its about the definition of a cult.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this is irrelevant to the topic at hand, if you have not the manners nor the deportment to conduct your self with a sense of decency with regard to the thread and the topic I would be very much pleased if you went elsewhere, again, the title of the thread is , definition of a cult, if you have nothing to add to that, then why are you posting in this thread? There are plenty of other threads where you can take cheap shots at others.

Are you saying that galveston75's quote was irrelevant to the topic at hand or are you saying me quoting, and objecting to, galveston75's quote was irrelevant to the topic at hand?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no its not about any rub, its about the definition of a cult.

People have said something along the lines of "I've also made several posts which directly address the OP and which you have chosen to ignore" to you more times on this forum than I can remember. And quite rightly so.

It is the rub alright.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no its not about any rub, its about the definition of a cult.

Here's a definition of 'cult' that seems to work pretty well:

In the West, the term has come to be used for groups that are perceived to have deviated from normative religions in belief and practice. They typically have a charismatic leader and attract followers who are in some way disenfranchised from the mainstream of society. Cults as thus defined are often viewed as foreign or dangerous.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cult

The Jehovah's Witnesses would seem to fit this definition.

Originally posted by FMF
Are you saying that galveston75's quote was irrelevant to the topic at hand or are you saying me quoting, and objecting to, galveston75's quote was irrelevant to the topic at hand?

entirely predictable, look, I have lready stated that Galvestons post has nothing to do with the topic and i would be pleased that if he too desisted from posting text that is non topic, and i will be pleased if you also, despite being asked three times to conduct yourself with manners, will also stop posting irrelevances, the thread is not about Galveston, its not about you, its about the definition of a cult. I should point out that it is not only bad manners, it is also against the forum posting guidelines. Please have the decency to refrain from posting irrelevances and cheap shots that contribute nothing to the thread.

Originally posted by FMF
People have said something along the lines of "I've also made several posts which directly address the OP and which you have chosen to ignore" to you more times on this forum than I can remember. And quite rightly so.

It is the rub alright.

ok, you will now be ignored, proving that you are simply here to troll, goodbye again why you continually seek attention and reduce discussions to irrelevances may only be known to you.

Originally posted by divegeester
Good question and welcome back by the way.

Thank you.

I do accept that I use the term provocatively,
Just provocatively, or derogatorily as well?

... but I do honestly think the JW organisation is a cult; I've explained my reasons for thinking this way and I feel it is justified.
But my point is that the reasons alone should suffice. There is no real gain by calling them a cult, unless you a) intend it derogatorily or b) want to imply more than your reasons alone provided.
You want people to recall all the bad things (real or imagined) they have heard about cults and associate them with the JWs.
There are times when category labels are justified, and times when they are grossly misused (as is the case with the word 'terrorist'.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
entirely predictable, look, I have lareday stated that galvestons post has nothing to do with the topic and i would be pleased that if he too desisted from posting text that is non topic, and i will be pleased if you also, despite being asked three times to conduct yourself with manners, will also stop posting irrelevances, the thread is not about Ga ...[text shortened]... ency to refrain from posting irrelevances and cheap shots that contribute nothing to the thread.

I take it this is all intended to distract from the fact that you had no real response to any of my several posts about the meaning and usage of the word "cult" other than to mutter over and over again about how you reckon I was being "intellectually lazy"?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I did not choose to ignore them, i read them, i simply had nothing to say in reply, again, the thread is not about you, the title is, definition of a cult.

My posts were not about "me" they were about the OP.

My other posts [hate card] were about a sub-topic you are frantically engaged in with other posters, so I chose to contribute via that route.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
entirely predictable, look, I have lready stated that Galvestons post has nothing to do with the topic and i would be pleased that if he too desisted from posting text that is non topic, and i will be pleased if you also, despite being asked three times to conduct yourself with manners, will also stop posting irrelevances, the thread is not about Gal ...[text shortened]... ency to refrain from posting irrelevances and cheap shots that contribute nothing to the thread.

Sorry Robbie. Please forgive me? If I need to be flogged I deserve it.... 🙂

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Here's a definition of 'cult' that seems to work pretty well:

In the West, the term has come to be used for groups that are perceived to have deviated from normative religions in belief and practice. They typically have a charismatic leader and attract followers who are in some way disenfranchised from the mainstream of society. Cults as thus defi ...[text shortened]... com/dictionary/cult

The Jehovah's Witnesses would seem to fit this definition.

all denominations that depart from what is considered mainstream would then fit that description. Are Jehovahs Witnesses the only group that has departed from mainstream, if not, then why are you signalling them out? thank you in advance?