Religious Manipulation?

[Quiddity]

Its actually the other way around.

You have a point, but that is in theology, not sociology of religion. Since you have studied this subject, what you say is not relevant when it comes to subjects like political religion, religious nationalism, and post secular society. Most prominent writings that examine religion and globalization tend implicitly to conflate the study of global religion and the comparative sociology of religion. If you go through some of the case studies using as you probably know analytical generalisations lets say the Robert Bellah study would show you the exact opposite of what you have just stated. You would know that in your class they probably used Bryan Turner and James Beckford as text books so they are honestly at odds with you.

I am not gonna go into specific matters but please consider. Have a great day. I appreciate your humility honestly. Its refreshing.

I’m aware of Bellah’s research at trying to flip the narrative and see it through the lens of events in time and world movement, rather than the driving force being more inward. It inadvertently redirects the focus to the layers on the outside, rather than the inside. Like I said, it’s a useful tool and it ultimately mitigates the core of the complexity rather than meet it head on. It’s difficult to do that when one is trying to show the connection between seemingly disparate forms of religiosity around the world and forces of the world that effect societies.


I didn’t go full hog on these courses so it’s very possible I may be missing something. But from what I do understand, it is incomplete.

 

[firedragon]

I’m aware of Bellah’s research at trying to flip the narrative and see it through the lens of events in time and world movement, rather than the driving force being more inward. It inadvertently redirects the focus to the layers on the outside, rather than the inside. Like I said, it’s a useful tool and it ultimately mitigates the core of the complexity rather than meet it head on. It’s difficult to do that when one is trying to show the connection between seemingly disparate forms of religiosity around the world and forces of the world that effect societies.


I didn’t go full hog on these courses so it’s very possible I may be missing something. But from what I do understand, it is incomplete.

That’s the whole point of the study of Sociology of religion.

 

[Quiddity]

That’s the whole point of the study of Sociology of religion.

Yes, but as is customary, if sociology needs to submit to, say, biological evolution for example, it provides appropriate sources and connections so as not deviate from established science. The question is whether it affords theology the same?

 

[firedragon]

Yes, but as is customary, if sociology needs to submit to, say, biological evolution for example, it provides appropriate sources and connections so as not deviate from established science. The question is whether it affords theology the same?

Absolutely. All the time.

 

[thomas t]

A passage we can look at and say this teaching makes it easier for others to manipulate the followers of this religion to for example commit violent acts.

let's see how the churches that supported Hitler argued back then.
The Herrnhuther Missionsgemeinde comes to mind. Mission - Evangelische Brüder-Unität – Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine
so lets see which Bible verses they picked:
“Gott hat unserem Volk einen Führer geschenkt, dem er die Autorität gegeben hat… Wir werden das Führerprinzip neu stärken“ 1
in English: "God has given us a leader, whom he conveyed authority... we will strengthen the leader principle!"

It's not a Bible verse. But Jesus being the leader certainly is a feature drawn from the Bible.. and they made this a principle. They saw this priniciple being applied with Hitler.

Another way of reasoning was:
"Er will seine Heilsgedanken verwirklichen" 2 which is "He will proceed his plans [using Hitler]".
Again, it's not a verse... but they referred to a Biblical concept: namely God's plan for this world as stated in Acts 22:14.
And, again they argued that God included Hitler in his biblical plan somehow.

The same church had a huge problem with the Old Testament, because they saw it as Hebrew friendly. 3

Christians should learn from this, I think.

1 see attachment, page 3.
2 see attachment, page 1.
3 see attachment, page 6. (German language)

 

[Bird123]

In Christianity, for example, it depends from the church you're going to.
Bible says in 1 Thess. 5:21, we should be sceptical.
But there are many churches that won't teach that, it appears to me.

But still, if someone wants to manipulate, they can go ahead and open the Bible. You can use the same book to do harm to people... or use it as a blessing, I think.

You make a good point. The degree of manipulating depends on each person. In addition, the degree of accepting also depends on each person.

There are good things in all holy books. As for the Bible, many of the things about Love are really good. On the other hand holy books are written by mankind. They reflect mankind. They teach many of the petty things mankind holds so dear like judging, condemning, intimidating, coercing and such. It establishes a we against they by defining sinful people. They create a God that manipulates His children by making conditions by which God would accept His children into Heaven. It leaves God lacking and helpless within the realm of free will.

So very much does not add up simply because mankind does not really understand God, what God is doing with this world and His children. Further by teaching those petty things, they point away from God not toward God.

There is a lot for religion to learn, Goodness is not entirely what they are teaching.

I have found no religion that really understands God. The Bible is no exception. On the other hand, I think there are bits and pieces of God in all holy books. In the Bible's case, I say concentrate on the parts about Love and let the rest go. I see that as the best chance of seeing God within a book written about the Beliefs of mankind.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Nakosis]

let's see how the churches that supported Hitler argued back then.
The Herrnhuther Missionsgemeinde comes to mind. Mission - Evangelische Brüder-Unität – Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine
so lets see which Bible verses they picked:
“Gott hat unserem Volk einen Führer geschenkt, dem er die Autorität gegeben hat… Wir werden das Führerprinzip neu stärken“ 1
in English: "God has given us a leader, whom he conveyed authority... we will strengthen the leader principle!"

It's not a Bible verse. But Jesus being the leader certainly is a feature drawn from the Bible.. and they made this a principle. They saw this priniciple being applied with Hitler.

Another way of reasoning was:
"Er will seine Heilsgedanken verwirklichen" 2 which is "He will proceed his plans [using Hitler]".
Again, it's not a verse... but they referred to a Biblical concept: namely God's plan for this world as stated in Acts 22:14.
And, again they argued that God included Hitler in his biblical plan somehow.

The same church had a huge problem with the Old Testament, because they saw it as Hebrew friendly. 3

Christians should learn from this, I think.

1 see attachment, page 3.
2 see attachment, page 1.
3 see attachment, page 6. (German language)

Couldn't this have been accomplished in other ways? Like using a successful historical figure/leader. Stalin for example seemed quite capable of manipulating people without religion. You mostly need a group identity to rally people behind. Christianity happened to be contemporary and convenient.

 

[Quiddity]

Absolutely. All the time.

If it did, it would be willing to supplant it above the Sociology.

 

[loverofhumanity]

And another fact is, that as long as the Master/Prophet is alive, teachings are at its purest. The moment He dies, things get easily corrupted.

Following others indeed is a sure path to loose yourself. Best and safest is to establish a personal connection with the Divine.

Hi stvdv. Yes a lot of religions no longer teach what the Founder originally taught. Gradually, over time, the religion of God degenerates into the sects of man.

 

[Clara Tea]

One must admire Jews for adhering to religion under Nazi torture. But, long before WWII, even Jews had limits, and were often converted rather than face long and painful death of themselves and everyone they knew. In Italy they were called "conversos" when converted (like the Jewish scientist from Galilee, Israel, Galileo).

Christian Teen-Torture Camps And Republican’s Reality-Denying Bubble

Inside a sadistic Christian 'troubled teen' program: Failed local mental health options spur 'tough-love' programs

When Wilderness Boot Camps Take Tough Love Too Far

Today, torturing people (in a Kind Kompassionate Konservative way) is no longer permitted, though there are camps for wayward kids that still use it in the United States. Example: Rock Solid Ministries had three officials convicted in January 2017 of aggravated child abuse. There are Christian camps where a lot of kids check in, and only a few check out....they just seem to "disappear" shortly after severe torture. (All in the name of God and Jesus, of course).

In the past priests have tortured conversion, then killed immediately (before they could change their minds). This earned sainthood.

 

[thomas t]

Couldn't this have been accomplished in other ways? Like using a successful historical figure/leader. Stalin for example seemed quite capable of manipulating people without religion. You mostly need a group identity to rally people behind. Christianity happened to be contemporary and convenient.

maybe. But in the case of Christians and the Nazi regime, the relationship was more complex, I think.

It's my impression that many Christians were passionate conservatives and simply were fans of strong conservative men. I see it as bad habit.
Moreover, they did not consider human rights as a value. They just wanted conservatism at all cost, I believe.
My grandmother, who grew up in a Baptist environment that knew the actual Good News from the Bible as it is getting preached today too, argued that she didn't see concentration camps as something negative back then... because her friend told her that they even had dentists.
So, she thought by herself that it certainly wasn't too bad in there.
But she (and I think their whole family background) did not have the slightest problem with one part of the population being segregated out into camps to begin with.

Racism was rampant. When she wanted to tell a cheerful story she went on that her father went on a hunt in Africa and was suddenly addressed by an indigenous person talking to them in German. Her father couldn't have laughed louder. "Do you imagine? That old Kaffa negro person trying to speak German? hahahahaha." So "funny". (By the time we had that conversation I also thought in these terms - big mistake!).

So they did not see human rights/ equality as mandatory or even as an option. Germans top, Kaffa people bottom. That's how they thought back then.
So they couldn't find anything bad with Hitler either. Yes he segregated the Jews out. "So what?"... they thought.

My granmother also recalled that there was also a chap that played the violin so wonderfully, a friend of the family, ... and he was deported for being a Jew, too. So sad, she thought.
Just for you so you don't think they were all monsters. They had feelings and were nice. The understanding of human rights was lacking, though.



As an aside: many Christians think that those who supported Hiltler cannot have been the real Christians.
But I tend to believe otherwise. I tend to believe that the Christians of back then were real and made (serious) mistakes. Many Christians also did not support Hitler. But churches often did.
And, to be clear, these are more or less the churches that are made up of real Christians as of today, as I see it.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The teachings of the religion is not just about the stories of the past, but also both the moral lessons that the stories try to teach by example. These lessons teach us about human nature both the good and the bad. The good and bad is often personified as characters in the stories; Jesus and Devil.

In terms of manipulation, these lessons of human nature, which do not change over time, makes one less susceptible to manipulation, since one can sense it in the humans, who will do the manipulating.

Does anyone remember the collusion delusion manipulation? How many atheist were sucked in? You had no lesson ti rely on for this type of manipulation. This type of hate scam, is not new to the bible and many other religious books, since it is part of the dark side of human nature. Hitler created hate for the Jews to blind people to their humanity, so they would willingly bear false witness. The Pharisee did this to Jesus. This is from gar dark side of human nature.

The violence in America cities come from the Godless. They have convinced themselves, with a little push from the propaganda machine, that the ends justifies the means. A good religion teaches one ways to avoid these pitfalls and not run with the dark side. Religion is why the Trump hater right, was able to adjust faster than the godless left, who has no conscience training.

Not all on the right are with religion and not all on the left are without.

 

[thomas t]

They teach many of the petty things mankind holds so dear like judging, condemning, intimidating, coercing and such.

when it comes to Bible, it says "judge not!", Luke 6:37. That's the general outline, as I see it.
There are other verses that show Biblical figures judging, as I see it. Paul judged Alexander, for instance, 1 Timothy 1:20. These are special cases, as I see it.
Once you have several verses that deal with the same issue... you need to take them all into account, to avoid manipulation.

The manipulation starts when you pick and choose.
A prominent example.
There are Bible verses about having same sex close relationships... and there are verses about remarrying after divorce, if there is no adultery involved.
In conservative Bible interpretation, both is wrong. (BTW, I'm neutral with regard to the question whether or not both is sin).
However, many churches do it this way: when it comes to homosexuals they say "but Bible plainly states".... but for remarried divorcees they throw the Bible into the corner.
That's manipulation as I see it: They manipulated the choice of their Bible passages for which they say "but Bible plainly states"... and this is also how their manipulate their followers, in my opinion. By focussing on half of the Bible only.

The Bible is a great book, for me it is the book of life - in its entirety only.

Thomas

 

[Bird123]

when it comes to Bible, it says "judge not!", Luke 6:37. That's the general outline, as I see it.
There are other verses that show Biblical figures judging, as I see it. Paul judged Alexander, for instance, 1 Timothy 1:20. These are special cases, as I see it.
Once you have several verses that deal with the same issue... you need to take them all into account, to avoid manipulation.

The manipulation starts when you pick and choose.
A prominent example.
There are Bible verses about having same sex close relationships... and there are verses about remarrying after divorce, if there is no adultery involved.
In conservative Bible interpretation, both is wrong. (BTW, I'm neutral with regard to the question whether or not both is sin).
However, many churches do it this way: when it comes to homosexuals they say "but Bible plainly states".... but for remarried divorcees they throw the Bible into the corner.
That's manipulation as I see it: They manipulated the choice of their Bible passages for which they say "but Bible plainly states"... and this is also how their manipulate their followers, in my opinion. By focussing on half of the Bible only.

The Bible is a great book, for me it is the book of life - in its entirety only.

Thomas

What about sin? What about hell? What about God judging and condemning? What about God placing conditions for Heaven? Aren't these things in the Bible?

In God's real system, there is no need to define good verses evil since everyone will learn the Best choices. Hell does not exist for what purpose would it serve? It is no more than an expression of hate.

God is very very smart just to be able to create this universe. Would not such an Intelligent Being find a way to allow all His children to make it to Heaven regardless no matter how long it would take? Would not such a Being know that Unconditional Love is the only way to really Love?

So much of the Bible simply does not add up. It reflects mankind and who mankind really is. How much does it teach that is not really the best choices?

Do you look at this world and see a mess? If you do, religion has corrupted your view. When you really understand God, you will see that this world and it's people are a Masterpiece!!!

There has never been a need for judging, condemning or frying the kids. There are better ways. Can you really not think of any???

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[thomas t]

What about sin? What about hell? What about God judging and condemning? What about God placing conditions for Heaven? Aren't these things in the Bible?

yeah they are all in the Bible. Nevertheless, Bible says you should not judge, in general.
For me, it comes down to distinguishing between judging persons, which is outlawed for humans by cited scripture as I see it, ... and judging actions, which is ok.
For instance, it is ok to tell me I'm bad at singing. Which would sadden me a lot, but that does not mean I am a bad musician or even a bad person!

Hell does not exist for what purpose would it serve?

it does exist, in my opinion. It would serve as a place for those who would endanger others in heaven or those who would pollute heaven like they did while on earth etc. In my opinion, if you would invite everyone to heaven, heaven would be earth for the victims. Again. It would be second earth. Those who suffer from persecution now would probably suffer again in the next "heaven", falsely so called in this scenario.

This unconditional love you're speaking of would be likely to be meaning unending suffering for the victims, as I see it.
When I see the pollution of God's nature on earth... I see a mess.
I see waste in the oceans, waste on the streets, orange skies when there is wild fires, ... I see mine companies pouring out their waste into the seas, I see oil companies ruining the environment and so on.
No, this is not flawed thinking.
Heaven should be a clean space I think, no pollution needed there!

 

[Bird123]

yeah they are all in the Bible. Nevertheless, Bible says you should not judge, in general.
For me, it comes down to distinguishing between judging persons, which is outlawed for humans by cited scripture as I see it, ... and judging actions, which is ok.
For instance, it is ok to tell me I'm bad at singing. Which would sadden me a lot, but that does not mean I am a bad musician or even a bad person!

it does exist, in my opinion. It would serve as a place for those who would endanger others in heaven or those who would pollute heaven like they did while on earth etc. In my opinion, if you would invite everyone to heaven, heaven would be earth for the victims. Again. It would be second earth. Those who suffer from persecution now would probably suffer again in the next "heaven", falsely so called in this scenario.

This unconditional love you're speaking of would be likely to be meaning unending suffering for the victims, as I see it.
When I see the pollution of God's nature on earth... I see a mess.
I see waste in the oceans, waste on the streets, orange skies when there is wild fires, ... I see mine companies pouring out their waste into the seas, I see oil companies ruining the environment and so on.
No, this is not flawed thinking.
Heaven should be a clean space I think, no pollution needed there!

You do not understand. People must learn how to create a heavenly state for themselves. Until this is accomplished, there will be many many lessons and lifetimes of learning.

Could the very best people you know really create a heavenly state? Not there yet!!

Are there really victims or hard lessons?

Worry not. at some point kiddies must clean up their rooms.

We are all learning that Unconditional Love is the Best choice. On the other hand, many have a long road before this is Discovered.

Take a few steps back. The dynamics of God's system is simply amazing. It is a Masterpiece.

If I were to build a world, I would copy God and make it the very same way.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[thomas t]

We are all learning that Unconditional Love is the Best choice.

I stay with my opinion. Universal Reconciliation - the teaching that all end up in heaven - doesn't see dangers.
It's mere speculation to say that those who pollute today will stop tommorrow, after having had "a long before this is discovered"... or after having cleaned up "their rooms", or after having learned to create "a heavenly state for themselves", as you put it. After all many companies don't just pollute "their rooms", they sometimes pollute rooms that are not theirs.
But quite often "their own rooms" are quite tidy.
Here, for instance, you only see tidied up and clean places: Beliefs and Culture (Bayer isn't better, by the way, I think)

Thomas

EDITED to add link.

 

[Bird123]

I stay with my opinion. Universal Reconciliation - the teaching that all end up in heaven - doesn't see dangers.
It's mere speculation to say that those who pollute today will stop tommorrow, after having had "a long before this is discovered"... or after having cleaned up "their rooms", or after having learned to create "a heavenly state for themselves", as you put it. After all many companies don't just pollute "their rooms", they sometimes pollute rooms that are not theirs.
But quite often "their own rooms" are quite tidy.
Here, for instance, you only see tidied up and clean places: Beliefs and Culture (Bayer isn't better, by the way, I think)

Thomas

EDITED to add link.

In a multilevel classroom, you will have students at different levels learning,teaching and pointing the way. Life is about learning and growing. Other's might not learn or grow as fast as you want, however how many can go through life and learn nothing?

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[thomas t]

how many can go through life and learn nothing?

learning you say.
In general, people learn a lot. I'm not saying there are people who just don't learn anything.


Even if all people learn something... would the people in this story (see below) ever stop perpetrating their victims?
I'm not saying the people in the post don't learn anything. Of course they do. Everyday in their daily lives... they learn. Many things. But where's the evidence that by consequence of what they learn they would suddenly stop perpetrating others?
Young girl abducted, forced into Muslim marriage - Open Doors USA

Thomas

 

[MNoBody]

Couldn't this have been accomplished in other ways? Like using a successful historical figure/leader. Stalin for example seemed quite capable of manipulating people without religion. You mostly need a group identity to rally people behind. Christianity happened to be contemporary and convenient.

Statism [which is the modality employed by that bunch] is indeed a "religion" as it is the same qualitatively in form/function and in effect.
all religion is crowd control, through stories, and the interested authors that pen history are the shamanic group which shepherds society along whatever "path' is the aim of their ideological bent.