|
Post by Admin on Jan 31, 2024 17:56:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 31, 2024 18:40:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 1, 2024 21:48:54 GMT
5 Characteristics of a Cult 1- Charismatic Leader: Cults always follow a leader whose words and ideas are considered uniquely authoritative or divinely inspired. The leader is typically a narcissistic and aggressive male. The leader may be considered a genius, a prophet or a messiah. There is often a worshipful attitude toward the leader. 2- “The Sky is Falling”: Cults typically traffic in fear. There is often a crisis that only the leader of the cult can resolve. Averting or preparing for a cataclysmic or apocalyptic event is often the primary mission. Cults will often exaggerate or even try to manufacture a crisis. 3- Extremist Beliefs: Cults tend to promote beliefs that are simplistic and extreme. Cults feed on conspiracy theories. Questioning the cult’s message is considered heresy and may result in punishment. 4- “Us Vs Them”: Cults thrive on division. Those on the outside, including family and friends, are seen as “the enemy”. Alternate ways of life are viewed as threatening. Members become increasingly isolated from mainstream society. 5- Propaganda Machine: As members slide deeper into the cult, they are met with a network of propaganda reinforcing the cult’s worldview. Outside sources of information are highly filtered and labeled untrustworthy. #AleksandrSolzhenitsyn
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 6, 2024 20:05:04 GMT
Can One Tell the Difference Between Religion and a Con Game? Surprising similarities between prophets and confidence tricksters Posted July 30, 2013 www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201307/can-one-tell-the-difference-between-religion-and-con-gameThe human propensity to believe the improbable keeps church doors open (1). It is also the reason that confidence tricksters live well. Perhaps prophets are merely con men who specialize in the spiritual. There are two ways to test out this idea. First, are mainstream religions founded by con men? Second, if one were to set up a fake religion, would it get exposed? Mormonism is an intriguing case history because it had a very shady past but has come to be accepted as a mainstream religion. As a comparatively new world religion it is susceptible to historical documentation in ways that were impossible for, say, Christianity. We do not know whether Jesus ever existed and historians like to expose problems in the New Testament account of his life. Joseph Smith actually existed and had a real criminal record. Mormon founder Joseph Smith as a con man Smith’s criminality is sketched by atheist writer the late Christopher Hitchens (2): In March, 1826, a court in Bainbridge, New York, convicted a twenty-one-year-old man of being a “disorderly person and an impostor.” That ought to have been all we ever heard of Joseph Smith, who at trial admitted to defrauding citizens by organizing mad gold-digging expeditions and also to claiming to possess dark or “necromantic” powers. Hitchens provides a scathing account of how the Book of Mormon was produced noting that “The actual story of the imposture is almost embarrassing to read and almost embarrassingly easy to uncover.” His account draws on the work of professional historian Fawn Brodie and her book No Man Knows My History (1945/1973). Hitchens concludes: “Quite recent scholarship has exposed every single other Mormon “document” as at best a scrawny compromise and at worst a pitiful fake” … If Smith’s texts were embarrassing fakes, the motivation underlying his prophecy is just as spurious. According to Hitchens (2): Like Muhammad, Smith could produce divine revelations at short notice and often simply to suit himself (especially, and like Muhammad, when he wanted a new girl and wished to take her as another wife). As a result he overreached himself and came to a violent end. … Still, this story raises some very absorbing questions, concerning what happens when a plain racket turns into a serious religion before our eyes.
|
|