- Topic
In the forum, I read a comment about a member who refuses to read Ash's Forbidden Book because it was removed from the church by Ash. This isn't the 1st time I've come across this excuse. They like to apply our "ridiculous" logic to extreme situations, so here's one for you:
A friend of your's has a diary full of all her secrets. She gives you her diary to read. You begin reading it and see she's been consealing fear behind her everyday smile. Without her diary, you would have never known she was afraid for her life; that a strange person had been following her. She doesn't tell anyone because she's afraid. She just records her thoughts, feelings, and events in her diary. For some reason, she tells you to stop reading her diary and expresses that you never share what you've read with anyone. You both agree to lock it away. A few days go by and she's found dismembered in her bedroom. The police begin to ask you questions to see if you have any leads. Immediately, you remember her diary. It gives specific descriptions of the stranger. Where she saw him. What he said to her. Everything the police need to catch him is in that diary. Then you recall her saying not to tell anyone what you read. So.. you keep it a secret. You lie to the police and say you have no idea who could have done this. Years pass.. decades pass.. her murder still hasn't been solved. You decide to share the book with the police. You explain the story and tell them why you've kept it a secret. But they refuse to hear you. You go to the family and give them the same layout. They follow suit with the officers. Why won't they listen? This diary will surely solve the case! You ask.. they answer.. "The author of this book doesn't want anyone to read it. So, we won't read it."
You see how foolish that sounds? Granted, no one should be dismembered due to their affiliation with the church (they shouldn't).. I wonder why Ash pulled the book off the shelves. That was never explained to me. Deaconess Deborah just said he recalled all the books. I also wonder why, if he truly didn't want anyone reading, he didn't pull it from being published again. Why are Ash's books available in the library in Korea but not in America?
I question if he even pulled it
@love'n honey –Better yet, if Ash really is the second coming, why is he making mistakes on his writings .. this question, yours and many more are out there, but the members refuse to ask or are extremely afraid or brainwashed .. so many questionable behaviors and yet no one in that church seems to careIs the "Forbidden Book" the one called Problems with New Jerusalem, the Mother, and the Veil, or something like that? I'm assuming it is.
Love'n Honey wrote:
In the forum, I read a comment about a member who refuses to read Ash's Forbidden Book because it was removed from the church by Ash. This isn't the 1st time I've come across this excuse.
Basic history books have records of leaders that get rid of books. It's quite simple really – they can then create new history. And no, I'm not talking about Ɲazi book-burning. Russia's government has a history of banning certain books that they don't approve of. Even in the USA – the supposed bastion of freedom – books have been banned here (albeit in different places, for example local school districts) that contained information that was politically sensitive.
The argument is typically the same: this is done for protection, the better good, because the other side is the enemy, blah, blah, blah – people always buy into it.
I'm not saying that Ahn did what he did with the intent to deceive. What I'm questioning is, wouldn't God want us to investigate when a pattern exists that is of suspect? Seems to me Jesus was ok with being examined.
Oh darn, again here I go with examining Ahn in the age of the Holy Spirit. That really is a tough thing, that unforgivable sin issue. I guess I'll go back to an unquestioning attitude…automaton mode, activated!
Of course it is different in countries that are not free (oh, but they claim they are bastions of freedom!!!) that banning a book can result in a bullet to the back of the head (reading or possessing said book).
But the similarity being that certain readings are sanctioned while others are not, and that someone or some powerful group at the top gets to decide what is sanctioned for reading….
What is the difference again?
And a minor point would be that the Hitlers and Stalins and other bad guys in world history would not have a list of banned books – the books are simply taken away, for a list of banned books acknowledges their existence. So, there is no "rule"; it just happens. People learn one way or another that they are not going to talk about it and violence in these totalitarian states is not an excuse for the structure of the model of information control – unwillingness to read just goes from the bullet-to-the-head end of the spectrum to the influence end of the spectrum. A theme in control methodology is the esoteric nature of information.
I hear what you are saying in your OP, btw.
Its called typical.
In that some information is sanctioned and some is not. It is really the same technique, just dissecting up the book. Don't expect it to make sense with your "out" mind. You will likely have to go back to "inside" mind to get some sort of a fleeting view as to the distorted logic used to justify [whatever].
Something along the lines of "it is so important but Satan has figured out a way to deceive with it, so it is in the best interest of members to not read it"? Protection is a common theme; from an evolutionary psychological standpoint protection makes sense – we relied on others for protection and for survival as the first thing we knew for many, many years. Why would it not appeal to us all throughout life? Another theme that works is disease – it works well enough to kill in genocides: Jews were dirty, diseased rats; Tutsis of Rwanda were cockroaches; the list goes on. Why not use it to ŕetaŕd the process of members reading what the group does not want read? ie, "that is a virus of the mind", "spiritual pornography", etc.
—-
as of edit: why is the word ŕetaŕd, when used in its proper context, censored? (<
rhetorical, do not answer)
@Love'n Honey"She refused to let me buy a book because she said I was going to use it against the gospel"
gos·pel
ˈgäspəl
noun.
The way the group teaches its members its doctrine. Often by way of stressing some areas of the Bible over others, or by determining if stressed Bible verses are metaphorical, literal, or parable as the group sees fit.
Hey, with that definition, Missionary Kelly was probably right on the mark!
Kelly huh? I remember that lady. I tried to get some straight answers out of her at one time and when I pointed out some discrepancies she went off the deep end on me. I had been told to expect everyone at the WMSCOG would love me however, I got everything but loved when I questioned the so called facts of the WMSCOG and their so called gods.
Questioninginla wrote:
Basic history books have records of leaders that get rid of books. It's quite simple really – they can then create new history. And no, I'm not talking about Ɲazi book-burning. Russia's government has a history of banning certain books that they don't approve of. Even in the USA – the supposed bastion of freedom – books have been banned here (albeit in different places, for example local school districts) that contained information that was politically sensitive.
The argument is typically the same: this is done for protection, the better good, because the other side is the enemy, blah, blah, blah – people always buy into it.
I'm not saying that Ahn did what he did with the intent to deceive. What I'm questioning is, wouldn't God want us to investigate when a pattern exists that is of suspect? Seems to me Jesus was ok with being examined.
Oh darn, again here I go with examining Ahn in the age of the Holy Spirit. That really is a tough thing, that unforgivable sin issue. I guess I'll go back to an unquestioning attitude…automaton mode, activated!
I'm not aware of any leader banning his own book.
good point.
A more analogous comparison would be that the leader alters history. People in photographs are taken out as though they never existed (in totalitarian regimes they were obviously executed). Official records that document certain policies that are no longer in place are shredded/destroyed – again, they "never existed"; to naive to refrain from inquiring about the old information? Bullet to the back of the head surely silences. But loss of life is not required for information control. This is essentially what Orwell wrote about in Animal Farm. New history is created by the alteration (over time) or outright deletion of what was in place before, and soon the people/(animals) no longer search for what was – they have what they need in front of them, provided by their loving leaders.
It works almost every time its tried, if done correctly.
There are a lot of lessons in literary "classics", but of course that is the work of man….
I heard that kids had to tithe. That is so ridiculous. Even the babies!
By the way, who is the keeper of the tithe records? I am assuming the pastors as there is no transparency at all as to how much is received by the church and where it goes.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.