“The Biblical Hook” (Using Nancy Campbell’s Ontological Subordination of Women as an Example of Sloppy Rhetoric)

From pages 41 -42 of “Scripture Twisting" by James Sire:

When Scripture is quoted, especially at the beginning of an argument which turns out to promote a cult doctrine or point of view, it may be that it is being used primarily as a hook to grasp the attention of readers or listeners. “The Bible says” gets the attention, but what follows the quotation may be far from traditional Christian teaching and far from the intention of the Bible itself.

We use shortcuts to help us sift through the tremendous amounts of information that we are bombarded with every day, and we do not have time to search out the truth about every fact. Cialdini’s book “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion” presents one of the best reviews and descriptions of this “rule of thumb” we use to help us get through daily life. For instance, when we see a person in a police uniform, we tend to assume that the person wearing the uniform is actually a policeman. This is a reasonable assumption to make, and we automatically respond to the person in the uniform as though they are with the police, but we may learn that they are only wearing the uniform as a costume or could be trying to be deceptive.

Tweet

The Postmodern Decay of Language: Why People Talk More and Say Less

"Paul Preaching In Athens" by Raphael

In response to several inquiries, I posted some information postmodernism which has opened up into more questions people have asked me about exactly how language has degraded within our culture. Now, more than ever, a growing number of people speak and use eloquent-sounding language, but their messages demonstrate a gross lack of content. Cults and spiritually abusive groups capitalize upon this process. One astute reader asked me how it is that more and more speakers and ministers can offer content-free speeches and sermons but how few people can recognize that their messages actually lack content. People “sound good,” offering “feel good” rhetoric, but they essentially say nothing and are rewarded for it. This reader asked me about possible sources of information to help them understand more about exactly how communicators manipulate language in order to say nothing.

Tweet

More on Church-Speak and Loaded Language

It has been awhile since I last referenced this list of equivocal terms on the Battered Sheep website. I'm surprised that I have not linked to it from my last few posts that discuss the multiple meanings of terminology and how the application of these terms conveys multiple meanings that are used to exploit the members of manipulative groups.

Tweet

Lessons in Loaded Language and Sacerdotalism

A few weeks ago, a friend wrote to ask me why I write only about issues in the evangelical church related to male headship and those who turn all things related to family life into some kind of new, holy sacrament. They pointed out that as an evangelical Christian, I should be equally concerned about Rick Warren and Joel Osteen, implying that those who speak out against patriocentricity should give these other problem areas in the church more attention.

I have one very primary reason for focusing on the patriocentrics and those who share their ideals. I do so because I’ve experienced and witnessed these abuses first hand, and these very things became a very real part of my world. My friends and I still wrestle with these problems in our churches and our lives. When I found healing and saw that there were ways that I could help those who have been deceived by these subtle things as I once was, I responded by helping others who now stand where I once stood. I communicate information to them that I desperately needed at the time but found few people who could address my pains and journey. I know how these particular groups code their language, am familiar with how they practice, so I bring more relevant and practical insight into the discussion. I certainly could read Rick Warren’s books and comment on what others have written about them, but I never went to church with Warren or Driscoll and only know of them from what others have told me about them.

Tweet

Pulling Apart the Ambiguous Terminology of the FIC: “Multigenerational Faithfulness” (The First of Many Posts on the Topic)

I’ve read much about this term “multigenerational faithfulness,” a loaded language phrase created by those affiliated with the Family Integrated Church (FIC) and used extensively by those affiliated with Vision Forum including James McDonald, Voddie Baucham and RC Sproul, Jr. Though I cannot find the use of this specific phrase on any websites related directly to Doug Wilson or the CREC, they do promote and practice the same core concepts using the term “covenantal succession" or some variation of that instead.

Tweet

The Logical Fallacy of Redefining Terms and Other Boobytraps

A friend of mine noted once that a phase from one of my favorite hymns, “Victory in Jesus,” always makes her laugh because “He plunged me to victory” conjures up the image of a toilet plunger for her. About 95% of the time, when we refer to“plunge” in our contemporary society, we use the word in reference the process of plunging a blocked toilet with a red rubber toilet plunger on a wooden handle. Likewise, when the hymn was written in 1939 and during the time that the author was raised, indoor flushing toilets were still somewhat new in very many homes. As a consequence, the first image to pop into the author’s head was not likely a red toilet plunger, but rather this physical dynamic of water alone. The translation of meaning between the era in which the hymn was written and our current era creates ambiguity.

Tweet

First Documented Occurance of Thought Reform, "Loaded Language" and Spiritual Abuse

From a reader:

“I am going to have to process this deeply. I have really gotten convicted about the loaded language and how much I have allowed it to define the debate.”

“Cindy, I would love to see you expand upon the use of words to redefine people’s beliefs. This is becoming more and more clear to me. I can see how just using the word ‘feminists’ redefines the conversation. All of a sudden one feels compelled to prove they are not a feminists and before they know it, they have aligned themselves with their views.”

Tweet

Loading the Language (Lifton 101)

The group interprets or uses words and phrases in new ways so that often the outside world does not understand.

Connotation also plays a major role in the loading of language. A most potent means of loading the language comes through accusations such as "gossip", "rebellion", "Jezebel" and the like, as these are modifiers to be avoided at all costs by membership.

Please review these previous posts regarding the nature of the use of connotation, thought-stopping cliché and neologism to manipulate individuals without their awareness of the process:

Tweet

"Biblical" Modifiers and Discernment

Of the many oddities of post-Christian culture, many in the church seem to have also inherited a tendency towards a type of postmodern discernment (or lack thereof). Postmodernism prefers intuitive reasoning and many Christians who have been raised in the era of postmodernism prefer it as well. "Heart knowledge" is preferred to "head knowledge" in many denominations, thus many Christian leaders actually teach this kind of subjective reasoning and validation of truth. Also consider that we are now bombarded with considerably more information that we can reasonably consider, and ideology is now marketed right along with goods and services. If we possess adequate discernment skills, we may have no time or opportunity to objectively evaluate things, especially ideas.

We Christians fall prey to this all the time. It’s very easy to assume that when someone uses the same type of religious language that we are talking about the same religious concepts. This is increasingly not the case in our information-driven world. Christians even capitalize on this, using the emotional connotation of certain words and concepts to package their beliefs. Trusting the language of the heart can pull us into subjective reasoning if we are not discerning. Also, if we trust the source of the information, we also let our guard down, assuming that we don’t have to critically evaluate new messages. When we trust language, even when we have great confidence in the source, we make ourselves vulnerable.

Tweet

The Term "Biblical" Becomes a Thought Stopping Cliche?

Patriarchy and the Family Integrated Church crowd often use connotation and neologism to communicate a concept without all the negative connotation, but they get their ideas across.

How do they do that?

This is a response that I posted elsewhere online in response to a comment of the use of the term "non-normative" as a term that is understood to be "sin." Likewise, in a positive sense, the word "Biblical" is also used to connotate anything that is unquestionably good. Here is the response that I gave, basically as a demonstration of how Cialdini's "weapons of influence" can be used against us in religious or worship settings and how neologism and connotation play into this subtle form of manipulation.

Connotation and neologism is a technique of thought reform. Satan has been doing it since the Garden of Eden (”Ye shall not SURELY die…”). Call it beguiling, call it manipulation, call it spiritual abuse, call it propaganda, call it newspeak, call it patriospeak or patriobabble. What is it? Maybe it’s worse than original sin? And unsuspecting people eat it right up, especially in the age of postmodern advertising and kitsch. It’s a religious version of a shopping network, selling ideas (and grenades) by capitalizing on image.

It’s subtle. The litigious can say that they have not claimed that when they said A that they meant B, while everyone (outside of their influence of title and position) knows that A and B are the same things and are used in the same way. The amazing thing about the process is that it causes cognitive dissonance. 

Because the very nature of what they say about A and B is the same and yet contradiction, the critical thinking process in your brain pauses because of the congruences. This puts a person in a highly suggestible state. It can be dangerous if you are not very determined to stand by your doubts, because the very confusion that is created by the statements makes one easier to manipulate. Now, put this in the context of a sermon, where you are constrained from questioning and naturally want to conform to the group. 

Social proof makes it tremendously hard to resist, all while trying to figure things out. It pulls your proverbial legs out from under you. Now have an authority figure call you up in front of the congregation for some reason. Say it is for an object lesson or demonstration of a point the authority is trying to make. Humans like to respond to authority, as a general rule. There you have both authority as a pressure compounded with social pressure. 

And what if you really like your authority? We tend to comply when we like the person that has petitioned our compliance. What if he has done the same type of thing for us in the past? (He’s served as a participant in sermons that I’ve preached…) That’s reciprocity at work. Throw that into the mix when they are trying to sell you a contradictory idea. The pressure is tremendous. 

Okay, throw “non-normative” out there for people under these circumstances, with all these pressures at work. Hear “non-normative” a couple of times, and cognitive dissonance demands attention and seeks the path of least resistance to alleviate the psychological stress that the discontinuity produces. It will do so by just accepting the term without criticism or thought about how it is used. You now understand that non-normative means sin. 

These neologisms (Or as Doug Phillip reportedly states “He who defines, wins”) actually stop your critical thought. They present only one thinkable alternative then, and use emotion to blackmail their followers into accepting their alternative. This is very akin to bounded choice, when you believe you have reasonable choices, but those alternatives are presented in a way that really offers no viable choice. Every time a person hears that term, their critical thinking just stops. This is what Lifton termed “Loading the Language.” If you want to sell an ideology, you have to have a slogan and buzz terms. They are powerful weapons against the unsuspecting.

Tweet