why me wrote:Not exactly. The Jim Jones cult did not allow its members to leave once the decision for a mass suicide was put into effect. Many were killed by gunfire and I remember one black woman pleading with Jim not to enact the death sentence that he imposed on the members. It is all on tape.
Oh, but they still had a choice, right? They could still leave if they wanted, couldn't they? Sure, there were consequences for leaving, but people still had a choice!
(I just love using Internet Mormon logic against Internet Mormons. It warms me all up inside).
If I remember correctly some did get out in the beginning of the tempest but most stayed. Thus they were denied the opportunity to leave. All had to die that chose to stay. To my knowledge those who chose to stay had no idea just what 'DAD' (Jim) had in mind.
What Schmoe is saying is they all had the choice to stay and die, or try to escape, and probably be shot in the attempt. They were able to choose their actions but not the consequences. So in a perverse way, the Jim Jones cult member had complete freedom right up to the end. They simply did not have any control over the consequences of their decisions.
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley
"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
Doctor Steuss wrote:My list of things that make Mormonism a cult:
1) It is an exclusive system of religious worship and practices. 2) It is a group bound together by the veneration of the same person/deity (for the most part, that is).
<--- Just finished reading Aspects of Religious Propaganda in Judaism and Early Christianity which made multiple (and frequent) reference to the "Jewish cult" and "Christian cult."
I propose a comprimise: everyone has to stop calling Mormonism a cult as soon as Mormons stop calling people anti-mormons.
Some people are anti Mormons, some are more what I would call LDS Critics. I prefer "critic" over anti. What Mormons call someone have no bearing on whether the LDS Church is or is not a cult.
why me wrote:. The LDS has dogma and it expects its members to live by it. As does the Roman Catholic Church.
Somebody better tell the Brethren then. They're struggling to define doctrine, let alone dogma.
I refer to the dogma that this required to enter the temple. It is rather straightforward. Also, the LDS church expects members to attempt to keep the commandments. It is certainly not liberal in that regard.
Doctor Steuss wrote:My list of things that make Mormonism a cult:
1) It is an exclusive system of religious worship and practices. 2) It is a group bound together by the veneration of the same person/deity (for the most part, that is).
<--- Just finished reading Aspects of Religious Propaganda in Judaism and Early Christianity which made multiple (and frequent) reference to the "Jewish cult" and "Christian cult."
I propose a comprimise: everyone has to stop calling Mormonism a cult as soon as Mormons stop calling people anti-mormons.
An antimormon is a specific word which defines a mindset of a certain group of people: those who fight against the LDS church. I think that it is a good term for such people or individuals. However, cult is used to signify a certain belief about the LDS church. It has a certain release to it because it has a hard consonant. For former members, it is a release to believe that they belonged to a cult as to decontruct their own reasons for joining in the first place.
But I can assure you that the LDS church is not a cult. I have seen people come and go in my ward. They come and leave. By leaving I mean they leave the church. No one actually cares that much. It is free will after all.
why me wrote:Not exactly. The Jim Jones cult did not allow its members to leave once the decision for a mass suicide was put into effect. Many were killed by gunfire and I remember one black woman pleading with Jim not to enact the death sentence that he imposed on the members. It is all on tape.
Oh, but they still had a choice, right? They could still leave if they wanted, couldn't they? Sure, there were consequences for leaving, but people still had a choice!
(I just love using Internet Mormon logic against Internet Mormons. It warms me all up inside).
If I remember correctly some did get out in the beginning of the tempest but most stayed. Thus they were denied the opportunity to leave. All had to die that chose to stay. To my knowledge those who chose to stay had no idea just what 'DAD' (Jim) had in mind.
What Schmoe is saying is they all had the choice to stay and die, or try to escape, and probably be shot in the attempt. They were able to choose their actions but not the consequences. So in a perverse way, the Jim Jones cult member had complete freedom right up to the end. They simply did not have any control over the consequences of their decisions.
I suppose that we can say the same for the jews in German concentration camps during WW II. But we all know that such a comment would fly like a lead balloon among intelligent people. I see no difference between your above comment and the one that I just stated.
why me wrote: Be that as it may, the LDS church is not a cult.
I would agree with this if you'd said, "Be that as it may, the LDS church is not a cult to me."
It occurs to me that there are many factors that go into an individual's personal definition of a cult and many factors that determine a person's experience with the church. To you and other Mormons, the church is not a cult. To many others (like myself), it most certainly and obviously is.
So yes, it's a pointless semantics argument. I've noticed with many Mormons (DCP chief among them), official cited definitions are of little consequence if they don't vibe with what that person believes. I often wonder what the point of talking to Mormons is at all, given they have their own brand of English, where words only mean church-approved or belief-congruent things.
In a previous statement I wrote about why former members may prefer to use the 'cult' term. I think that what I wrote does pass mustard. The LDS church does have strong principles to live by. It also has a strong story and a holy ghost witness as confirmation. All this makes an exist difficult. But to call the LDS church a cult may be stretching it just a little. But I must say that if I never had a spiritual confirmation as to the truthfulness of the Gospel as taught by the LDS, I would find leaving to be very easy, a piece of cake. Thus, I see no cult at all. Those with 'leaving' problems are usually those who received a spritiual confirmation. And even these people need to convince themselves it was a warm fuzzy once they do leave. And so between cult and warm fuzzy we have the rational for leaving by former members.
why me wrote:I propose a comprimise: everyone has to stop calling Mormonism a cult as soon as Mormons stop calling people anti-mormons.
An antimormon is a specific word which defines a mindset of a certain group of people: those who fight against the LDS church. I think that it is a good term for such people or individuals. However, cult is used to signify a certain belief about the LDS church. It has a certain release to it because it has a hard consonant. For former members, it is a release to believe that they belonged to a cult as to decontruct their own reasons for joining in the first place.
[/quote]
Now here's a linguistic theory to ponder!
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
why me wrote: But I must say that if I never had a spiritual confirmation as to the truthfulness of the Gospel as taught by the LDS, I would find leaving to be very easy, a piece of cake. Thus, I see no cult at all. Those with 'leaving' problems are usually those who received a spritiual confirmation. And even these people need to convince themselves it was a warm fuzzy once they do leave. And so between cult and warm fuzzy we have the rational for leaving by former members.
Do you think the FLDS is a cult? Do you think that members who are inside that organization perceive it to be a cult? Do you think that they believe they receive a spiritual witness of the truth?
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
why me wrote: It also has a strong story and a holy ghost witness as confirmation. All this makes an exist difficult. But to call the LDS church a cult may be stretching it just a little. But I must say that if I never had a spiritual confirmation as to the truthfulness of the Gospel as taught by the LDS, I would find leaving to be very easy, a piece of cake. Thus, I see no cult at all. Those with 'leaving' problems are usually those who received a spritiual confirmation. And even these people need to convince themselves it was a warm fuzzy once they do leave. And so between cult and warm fuzzy we have the rational for leaving by former members.
It's not that simple. Do you not have family ties within the church?
For many people, disappointing their family with news they no longer believe is like a gun to the head. That's what Mormons just don't seem to understand. And that feeling is fostered and encouraged by LDS culture, which is exactly why it most certainly is a cult (among many other reasons).
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.