- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobiethere are codes and standards of behavior placed on the supporter by out-side organisations fifa, fa, police and the club. the rules are mainly to ensure safety at matches. the rules are hardly 'strange or excessive' football fans actually have very few rules governing how they should behave. a fan also has the freedom to attend and not attend games at will. you could argue that groups within supporters such as some of the organized hooligan element could be described as cults though.
on the contrary there are certain codes and standards of behaviour that are expected of all football supporters, and if one contravenes that code, one is liable to be banished from the game. Are some not given a life time ban and cannot congregate with the other supporters for some gross misdemeanour? What is more, there exists at football matches, ...[text shortened]... iour, the mob mentality had taken over as their sense of personal responsibility was diminished.
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat isn't what I said robbie as you are well aware.
No one is saying that anyone does, the point is that the assertion has been made that entering or leaving a place of psychological pressure should be termed a cult, we might as well throw in the theatre of war while we are at it or going to the dentist to have root treatment.
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by divegeesterDo you not have an "anointed remnant" and a "great crowd" and a "Supreme Organizer" here on earth? I thought these things were "Biblical".
Then the only "cult" is that of my own making my own mind. I answer to no man, to no human leader of an organisation, there is no one to persecute me or to shun me for my decision.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by divegeesteralthough you may practice christianity on your own. you are still connected to the others by your shared belief. if you leave, regardless if you care what they think, other christians will think bad things are going to happen to you. i would define this as excessive control. christianity attempts to stop you leaving by having a belief structure that dictates you will be punished for leaving. once you have left it may no longer mater to you as you no longer believe but that is the same for all cults.
Then the only "cult" is that of my own making my own mind. I answer to no man, to no human leader of an organisation, there is no one to persecute me or to shun me for my decision.
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by stellspalfieI don't disagree with you in the most part.
although you may practice christianity on your own. you are still connected to the others by your shared belief. if you leave, regardless if you care what they think, other christians will think bad things are going to happen to you. i would define this as excessive control. christianity attempts to stop you leaving by having a belief structure that dic ...[text shortened]... left it may no longer mater to you as you no longer believe but that is the same for all cults.
However I do not force my belief on others, nor would I exert pressure if a person I knew decided not to be a Christian; I would not shun them, excluded them or in any way make them feel like an inferior human being.
01 Feb 13
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFPossibly, but I do not know who or where they are. I have family and distant acquaintances who are in the faith and I think they have some expectations/hopes for me but I do not indulge them.
Do you not have an "anointed remnant" and a "great crowd" and a "Supreme Organizer" here on earth? I thought these things were "Biblical".
I did my time in what I consider now to be a passive aggressive religious situation and I am now intolerant of these jumped-up spiritual dictators who feel they have some god-given right to lord it over those in their [apparent] care.
I have a repressed anger I'm sure.
01 Feb 13
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75I think we all new that anyway didn't we.
So it appears there are many descriptions and opinions of what a cult could be.
No doubt your leadership draw some comfort from the array literal descriptors which draw a haze of ambiguity across the term.
I am 100% certain that you are captive of a religious cult.
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by galveston75The word "cult" aside, maybe the criticisms that provoke the use of that word are in some ways valid when cited in the case of the "ones that are labeled that way" e.g. Muslims, Scientoligists, YECs, Jehovah's Witnesses, Moonies, Catholics, Branch Davidians etc. etc. etc.
Perhaps the accepted thought of a cult should or could not actually apply to ones that are labeled that way?
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by galveston75I don't think the sense that a group is a "cult" can be enumerated in terms of number of "accepted ideas". I think the accusation is much more of a "gut feeling" thing, a repulsion, a feeling of caution, sympathy, ruefulness etc.
If a organization or religion has one of the accepted ideas of a cult, is it now a cult?
If it had two of the accepted ideas of a cult, is it now a cult?
At what number does it actually become a cult?
01 Feb 13
Originally posted by divegeesterBy why do you want to label it/them a cult? Why not simply point out all the things you think are bad/wrong about their organisation? I think that when people try to force a label onto an unwilling subject it is in order to make claims that cannot genuinely be supported by force of argument/evidence but rather the misuse of definitions.
I am 100% certain that you are captive of a religious cult.
People do the same in the reverse, ie they refuse the use of definitions because they think that definitions magically bestow certain properties onto an object - the word 'evolution' comes to mind and the way certain people will insist that adaptation occurs but not evolution.
01 Feb 13
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFSo should the criticism of one person quailfy a religion to be a cult or does it take a hundred or ten thousand critical opinions to make it a cult?
The word "cult" aside, maybe the criticisms that provoke the use of that word are in some ways valid when cited in the case of the "ones that are labeled that way" e.g. Muslims, Scientoligists, YECs, Jehovah's Witnesses, Moonies, Catholics, Branch Davidians etc. etc. etc.