Definition of a cult

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Why have you singled Jehovahs witnesses out, you may like to start by answering the question. You might like to start with, I have singled Jehovahs Witnesees out because . . .

I've already answered the question twice. However it seems that RC is determined to play his usual childish game of pretending not to understand that I have.

What's of interest is understanding why he is playing this game. If I had to guess, it's because RC is afraid to acknowledge the following:

The fact is that the following seems to be a reasonable definition of 'cult' and the JWs seem to fit the definition pretty well:
[quote]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

[/quote]

It would seem that RC is afraid the light of truth. RC has shown this repeatedly over the years with his continued and ongoing use of deceit in his posts.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I've already answered the question twice. However it seems that RC is determined to play his usual childish game of pretending not to understand that I have.

What's of interest is understanding why he is playing this game. If I had to guess, it's because RC is afraid to acknowledge the following:
[quote]The fact is that the following seems to be a re n this repeatedly over the years with his continued and ongoing use of deceit in his posts.

As suspected you are nothing if not predictable, you were not asked if Jehovahs witnesses fit the definition of a cult, you were asked, why you singled Jehovahs witness out, to which you have failed to give any answer. Here is the question again,

why have you singled Jehovahs witnesses out. You may reply,

I have singled Jehovahs witnesses out because . . . . . . . . .

1. I am prejudiced against them
2. I cannot think of any other cults
3. There are no other cults
4. I cannot say because it will incriminate me
5. Any other reason

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
As suspected you are nothing if not predictable, you were not asked if Jehovahs witnesses fit the definition of a cult, you were asked, why you singled Jehovahs witness out, to which you have failed to give any answer. Here is the question again,

why have you singled Jehovahs witnesses out. You may reply,

I have singled Jehovahs witnesses o ...[text shortened]... 3. There are no other cults
4. I cannot say because it will incriminate me
5. Any other reason

As suspected you are nothing if not predictable, you were not asked if Jehovahs witnesses fit the definition of a cult, you were asked, why you singled Jehovahs witness out, to which you have failed to give any answer.

But I have given an answer. Not just once but twice. In fact I've already pointed this out to you before:

I've already explained this twice now.

I first explained like this:
[quote]From what I can tell, this thread was borne from a discussion you were having with DG on the "@ JWs on [your] Jehovah and killing" thread which you capped off on page 2 with the following post:
[quote]You stated that Jehovahs Witnesses are a cult, i am addressing your last post. It is a term you have used consistently in your criticism, therefore, what is your definition of a cult.

Seems to get to the heart of the matter, doesn't it?
[/quote]

Then I re-explained it like this:

I already explained that I was getting to the "heart of the matter" which is whether or not the JWs fit the definition of a cult per the discussion that prompted this thread. Not sure what you don't understand about this.

Now you're asking me to explain it to you a third time? [/quote]

What do you think you gain by telling such blatant lies?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Barack Obama does not define the ethos of the American federal government, FAIL
Richard Branson does not define the business laws under which his companies operate, EPIC FAIL
Steve Jobs, yes, cult leader
Gandhi? not sure why he is here, again passive resistance operated under laws established not by Gandhi, but by others, EPIC FAIL OF BIBLICAL PRO my premise stands like a cockerel crowing upon a fence in bright sunshine in the morning haze.

How did Steve Jobs define the business laws under which his company operate exactly?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]As suspected you are nothing if not predictable, you were not asked if Jehovahs witnesses fit the definition of a cult, you were asked, why you singled Jehovahs witness out, to which you have failed to give any answer.

But I have given an answer. Not just once but twice. In fact I've already pointed this out to you before:

I've already e ...[text shortened]... you a third time?

What do you think you gain by telling such blatant lies?[/b]

Can anyone point me to where thinkofone answered the question, why have you singled Jehovahs witnesses out, thanks in advance - Robbie.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
How did Steve Jobs define the business laws under which his company operate exactly?

I was only jesting.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I was only jesting.

Richard Branson, charismatic leader of Virgin who defined the ethos of the company. Virgin isn't a cult, your busted.

See you later.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b] I am uninterested in anything else you have to say, simply please tell the forum why you have singled Jehovahs witnesses out.

I've already explained this twice now.

I first explained like this:

From what I can tell, this thread was borne from a discussion you were having with DG on the "@ JWs on [your] Jehovah and killing" thread whi foreign or dangerous.

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

[/b]

But I have given an answer. Not just once but twice. In fact I've already pointed this out to you before:
[quote]I've already explained this twice now.

I first explained like this:
[quote]From what I can tell, this thread was borne from a discussion you were having with DG on the "@ JWs on [your] Jehovah and killing" thread which you capped off on page 2 with the following post:
[quote]You stated that Jehovahs Witnesses are a cult, i am addressing your last post. It is a term you have used consistently in your criticism, therefore, what is your definition of a cult.

Seems to get to the heart of the matter, doesn't it?
[/quote]

Then I re-explained it like this:

I already explained that I was getting to the "heart of the matter" which is whether or not the JWs fit the definition of a cult per the discussion that prompted this thread. Not sure what you don't understand about this.

Now you're asking me to explain it to you a third time? [/quote]

What do you think you gain by telling such blatant lies? [/quote]

RC seemingly continues to believe that the way to cover up his lies is by using yet more deceit. Perhaps RC believes that if he doesn't acknowledge what is plainly displayed in front of him, it doesn't exist.

It's not like RC hasn't tried this tack many times before and always with the same result. He embarrasses himself and he embarrasses the Watch Tower Society as a representative of that organization.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Richard Branson, charismatic leader of Virgin who defined the ethos of the company. Virgin isn't a cult, your busted.

See you later.

whut? are you in your senses?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[quote]But I have given an answer. Not just once but twice. In fact I've already pointed this out to you before:
[quote]I've already explained this twice now.

I first explained like this:
[quote]From what I can tell, this thread was borne from a discussion you were having with DG on the "@ JWs on [your] Jehovah and killing" thread which you capped of ...[text shortened]... nd he embarrasses the Watch Tower Society as a representative of that organization.

Can anyone point me to where thinkofone answered the question, why have you singled Jehovahs witnesses out, thanks in advance - Robbie.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Can anyone point me to where thinkofone answered the question, why have you singled Jehovahs witnesses out, thanks in advance - Robbie.

RC seemingly continues to believe that the way to cover up his lies is by using yet more deceit. Perhaps RC believes that if he doesn't acknowledge what is plainly displayed in front of him, it doesn't exist.

It's not like RC hasn't tried this tack many times before and always with the same result. He embarrasses himself and he embarrasses the Watch Tower Society as a representative of that organization.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
RC seemingly continues to believe that the way to cover up his lies is by using yet more deceit. Perhaps RC believes that if he doesn't acknowledge what is plainly displayed in front of him, it doesn't exist.

It's not like RC hasn't tried this tack many times before and always with the same result. He embarrasses himself and he embarrasses the Watch Tower Society as a representative of that organization.

all you have to do is provide the answer, if you have stated it clearly, it should be easy. I have singled out Jehovahs witness because . . . . . . .

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
all you have to do is provide the answer, if you have stated it clearly, it should be easy. I have singled out Jehovahs witness because . . . . . . .

But I have given an answer. Not just once but twice. In fact I've already pointed this out to you before:
[quote]I've already explained this twice now.

I first explained like this:
[quote]From what I can tell, this thread was borne from a discussion you were having with DG on the "@ JWs on [your] Jehovah and killing" thread which you capped off on page 2 with the following post:
[quote]You stated that Jehovahs Witnesses are a cult, i am addressing your last post. It is a term you have used consistently in your criticism, therefore, what is your definition of a cult.

Seems to get to the heart of the matter, doesn't it?
[/quote]

Then I re-explained it like this:

I already explained that I was getting to the "heart of the matter" which is whether or not the JWs fit the definition of a cult per the discussion that prompted this thread. Not sure what you don't understand about this.

Now you're asking me to explain it to you a third time? [/quote]

What do you think you gain by telling such blatant lies? [/quote]

RC seemingly continues to believe that the way to cover up his lies is by using yet more deceit. Perhaps RC believes that if he doesn't acknowledge what is plainly displayed in front of him, it doesn't exist.

It's not like RC hasn't tried this tack many times before and always with the same result. He embarrasses himself and he embarrasses the Watch Tower Society as a representative of that organization.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[quote][b]But I have given an answer. Not just once but twice. In fact I've already pointed this out to you before:
[quote]I've already explained this twice now.

I first explained like this:
[quote]From what I can tell, this thread was borne from a discussion you were having with DG on the "@ JWs on [your] Jehovah and killing" thread which you ca ...[text shortened]... e embarrasses the Watch Tower Society as a representative of that organization.[/b][/b]

all you have to do is provide the answer, if you have stated it clearly, it should be easy. I have singled out Jehovahs witness because . . . . . . .

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
all you have to do is provide the answer, if you have stated it clearly, it should be easy. I have singled out Jehovahs witness because . . . . . . .

Let me help him explain. He has singled out Jehovah's Witnesses because we have two such deceived individuals on this forum and he wishes to help you understand the mind-control that this cult has over you. 😏