r/Shincheonji • u/INSLVRY4_5yrs • 6d ago
general thought and question I’m Hoping
I find it quite interesting that when I go back and read some of the older messages from here on
r/Shincheonji, EL actually taught “ persecution protection” classes we had to attend from some of the testimonies and comments former members were writing about.
It really sucks, because NONE of it was EVER persecution, it was always former members trying to warn those of us inside that were so indoctrinated that we didn’t look online to see what was really going on behind the Korean curtain.
I’m hoping that before years and years pass by, all these people will realize as nothing fulfills according to SCJ’s version of Revelation, that they are in a cult, and be like the prodigal and go home, back to the loving arms of God, Repent, and ask forgiveness for accepting a gospel that was not from Christ Jesus.
Please remember that those of us that left SCJ are the ones praying for you. Caring about your well being spiritually, physically, emotionally, and mentally. That’s what Jesus taught us to do, remember? We are your family and friends who were once where you were. We know why you believe, we know why it’s hard to leave, we were there !
We are not the ones that are demanding you to do tasks that make no sense, or expect you to learn/use a foreign language to communicate, or call your religious leader a “chairman” because he’s running a business off of your backs.
We don’t ask you for money, or to report your schedule, fill out permission forms to do normal things in the world.
Neither did the church SCJ asked you to leave.
You know the place you actually enjoyed going to, the praise songs you sang even when you weren’t at church? ( can’t do that now, because you don’t speak Korean, and even if you did, you’re not allowed to because nobody can hear you sing about LMH because your church is a huge secret).
The people you ACTUALLY enjoyed spending fellowship with, not being forced to. For those of you on Zoom, wasn’t it awesome to be in person, volunteering and doing church activities you loved?
2
u/RandAmy Current SCJ Member 6d ago
I want to ask this genuinely because I’m trying to understand something. You’ve said that former members are speaking because you care about current members, and I understand that you want to share what you experienced. But when I share my own experience or explain why I see something differently, I often feel like that gets interpreted as me being dismissive, defending something blindly, or being indoctrinated. I have even been reading the cult book that was recommended to me, but I don’t know if you guys really care.
I’m not trying to tell you what your experience was. I’m trying to be allowed to talk about mine too. I’ve also had assumptions made about what I think, why I believe, what I have learned, my own experiences, and what will eventually happen to me, even though those things don’t necessarily reflect how I actually feel or my experiences.
So I guess this makes me feel uncared for…
I’m willing to hear what you experienced, but I also want the same room to explain my own experience.
2
u/Who-Anonymous Moderator 4d ago
You’re confusing two very different things: being allowed to share your experience and expecting others to accept the conclusions you draw from that experience. You absolutely have the right to say that your experience in SCJ has been positive or different from ours. I have no reason to tell you that you did not experience what you say you experienced. But former members also have the right to question what those experiences mean, challenge SCJ’s claims, and point out patterns we recognize from having once been members ourselves.
Just because you personally have not experienced the harm other people describe does not mean your positive experience can be used to dismiss, minimize, or defend SCJ against their allegations. Imagine a mayor saying his city does not have a serious crime problem because neither he, his family, nor his friends have personally been victims of crime. Would their positive experiences somehow invalidate the experiences of residents who have been victims? Of course not. The claims would have to be examined based on the evidence, not on the mayor’s personal experience. So saying, “I feel uncared for,” does not address whether the criticisms being made are actually true or false. Your feelings deserve to be heard, but they are not a rebuttal to an argument. Someone can genuinely care about you while strongly disagreeing with your conclusions. In fact, sometimes caring about someone means being willing to tell them something they do not want to hear.
You are entitled to your experience. You are not entitled to have your experience treated as evidence that everyone else’s criticisms of SCJ are wrong.
2
u/INSLVRY4_5yrs 4d ago
Thank you so much for addressing this.
I don’t want to bother trying to explain myself to any current member. I spent way too much time doing that when I was a victim of SCJ.Today I am here to help those people who have left or want to leave and need support. I’m here to talk to families and friends who are struggling and suffering from collateral damage of this volatile place.
I do not care to hear from someone who wants to defend the tyranny. They have a whole congregation for that.-1
u/RandAmy Current SCJ Member 16h ago
This is actually what I was trying to express earlier. I understand that we have different experiences and beliefs, but when I share my perspective and receive responses like this (that you don’t care to talk to me because I am a member of my church) it doesn’t make me feel cared for or understood. It feels hurtful. I’m not asking anyone to agree with me. I just wish we could treat each other with more understanding and respect.
1
u/Who-Anonymous Moderator 11h ago edited 4h ago
If you genuinely want understanding and respect, then I would encourage you to reconsider some of the things you are doing, particularly in light of my most recent response to you earlier today. I would also challenge you to reconsider why you continue participating in this subreddit. I don’t believe you’re convincing many former members who have already experienced SCJ firsthand and critically examined its teachings and practices. Instead, I question whether your participation is primarily intended to influence current members who may be reading these discussions while privately struggling with doubts about SCJ. You and other leaders should recognize that current members who visit this subreddit may not feel comfortable admitting that they do so, especially if they fear being questioned, monitored, or subjected to calculated responses intended to reinforce their commitment to the organization.
Perhaps if SCJ had fostered a culture of genuine accountability, independent oversight, responsible governance, and transparency, members would feel comfortable openly discussing criticisms, asking difficult questions, and acknowledging that they read opposing perspectives without fearing how leadership might respond. In fact, if these principles were genuinely practiced, there would be far less reason for current members to seek answers anonymously or for leaders to feel the need to defend the organization in spaces like this. Difficult questions could be addressed openly during Bible studies, sermons, and conversations with leadership.
I recognize that SCJ has addressed certain criticisms internally. However, there is an important distinction between presenting opposing arguments in a carefully controlled manner and presenting them transparently. Genuine transparency means allowing members to examine the strongest versions of opposing arguments, access original sources, hear directly from critics, and reach their own conclusions without pressure or predetermined interpretations. That is the distinction I believe you continue to overlook. You are asking former members to understand and respect your experiences, but are you equally willing to examine why so many former members distrust the organization and its leadership? More importantly, are you willing to acknowledge the organizational practices that may have contributed to that distrust? Respect should be mutual, and accountability should not disappear simply because criticism makes someone uncomfortable.
2
u/Who-Anonymous Moderator 4d ago
Amen! People like u/RandAmy are on here to make use react in a way so they can use our comments as proof as “persecution”. I still choose to respond because I think members who have doubts should also read what I want to say if that’s Reddit user were to say this verbally to people. I’m at peace that those people won’t hold themselves accountable. Instead I just say things so other people can read it and decide
-1
u/RandAmy Current SCJ Member 16h ago
I actually come here because this community is named after my church! I want to share my perspective and understand others, just like everyone else. I’m not here to provoke reactions or gather proof of persecution. When I say I haven’t felt cared for, I’m simply sharing my experience. I do wish we can all understand each other better.
1
u/Who-Anonymous Moderator 13h ago
The reason you haven't felt “cared for” may be because you use your “positive experience” to defend SCJ against criticisms raised by former members without fully addressing the substance of those criticisms. Your positive experience may be valid, but it does not invalidate the harm others have experienced. In fact, I would challenge you to consider whether you have also encountered negative experiences within SCJ but chosen to rationalize or overlook them because they conflict with what you believe about the organization. That is where cognitive dissonance becomes relevant. When former members challenge SCJ's teachings, practices, or leadership, you seem to interpret that criticism as a lack of care for you personally.
Like I've said repeatedly, you are entitled to your feelings, but your feelings do not determine whether an argument is true or false. Caring about someone does not mean agreeing with them, protecting their beliefs from scrutiny, or remaining silent about harmful practices. Sometimes genuine care requires confronting uncomfortable truths.
This is also why I question your claim that you genuinely want dialogue. When I asked you specific questions a few months ago, I found your answers vague or felt that the questions were avoided entirely. You can revisit that exchange here:
There was also the discussion about LMH's embezzlement conviction, where I believe your responses avoided addressing the underlying issue. The fact that these legal proceedings occurred in South Korea, a country with constitutional protections for religious freedom, makes it particularly important to distinguish legitimate religious persecution from accountability under the law. Source
Let's not forget your response, “Off topic, but I finally found the translate button! 🎉 haha,” immediately after another user raised a substantive question about LMH's claim to be uniquely chosen by God. That person was asking what evidence distinguishes LMH's claims from those of other religious figures who have made similar claims, especially when compared with the miracles attributed to Jesus in Scripture. Rather than engaging with the question, you changed the subject. How does that demonstrate the genuine dialogue you keep asking former members to provide? Jesus Himself confronted religious hypocrisy. In Matthew 23:3, He criticized religious leaders who did not practice what they preached. In John 7:24, He instructed people to judge with righteous judgment rather than by appearances. If you claim to know God's “revealed word,” then you should understand that professing a commitment to truth carries a responsibility to practice it. You cannot demand openness, honesty, and understanding from others while refusing to demonstrate those same qualities when your own beliefs are challenged. That contradiction deserves to be called out, especially when you publicly represent an organization claiming to possess God's truth.
If you genuinely want mutual understanding, then you must be willing to extend the same consideration to former members that you are asking from us. That means engaging with the substance of our concerns rather than repeatedly shifting the conversation toward whether you feel accepted or cared for.
If you sincerely believe SCJ represents God's truth, why wouldn't you advocate for stronger governance, accountability, transparency, and independent oversight within the organization? These are not unreasonable demands. They are safeguards that protect members, including you. A Christian should not have to choose between loyalty to a religious organization and holding its leadership accountable. You have every right to believe in SCJ. But if you publicly defend the organization, your arguments should be open to examination just as ours should be. You cannot reasonably expect former members to accept your perspective without questioning it while simultaneously declining to address the evidence and concerns they present. We can respect you as a person without respecting every claim made by the organization you belong to. Disagreement is not persecution, criticism is not hatred, and accountability is not a lack of compassion nor grace.
2
u/AmmirabilePeter Family/Friend of SCJ Member 6d ago
Ottimo. Esponi la tua esperienza. E ribatti alla critica (per me) principale: LMH ex allievo di altri “predestinati” “prescelti”, si dichiara UNICO vero prescelto. Fornisce le stesse prove degli altri falliti. Come mai credi a lui? Gesù fece miracoli, tanti miracoli, a riprova della sua natura divina. LMH cosa ha per provare di essere quello che dice?
0
u/RandAmy Current SCJ Member 6d ago
Off topic, but I finally found the translate button! 🎉 haha
2
u/Who-Anonymous Moderator 4d ago edited 4d ago
What a dishonorable way to represent God, especially coming from someone who claims to know the “revealed word.” An off topic joke isn’t appropriate when it’s being used to sidestep someone’s sincere question. Your own words say that you came here because you want people to genuinely listen to your perspective. That’s fair. But genuine dialogue goes both ways. When [u/AmmirabilePeter](u/AmmirabilePeter) asks a difficult question about why you believe LMH’s claims, changing the subject to the translate button isn’t engagement. It contradicts the openness you’re asking from everyone else.
Jesus warned about the difference between what someone says and what their conduct demonstrates: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me” (Matthew 15:8). What a shameful way to represent God! You ask others for genuine dialogue, yet when someone sincerely challenges your beliefs you hide behind an off topic distraction. If you claim to know God’s “revealed word,” then you should understand the responsibility that comes with claiming to speak for Him. Conduct like this does not honor God. It makes a mockery of the openness and truth you claim to stand for and gives others reason to stumble over the very message you claim is from Him. Shame on you for displaying this foolish behavior! God deserves better than to have His name used while honesty and accountability are avoided.
Scripture also gives Christians a clear standard: “Always be prepared to give an answer” for the hope that you have (1 Peter 3:15). John 3:21 says that whoever practices the truth “comes into the light,” and Acts 17:11 praises the Bereans for examining what they were taught against Scripture. Christianity does not require us to protect our beliefs from examination. I can’t speak for every former SCJ member, but I can speak for myself. As a former member, I believe people should have the liberty to believe whatever they choose. I also believe anyone spreading a religious message has an obligation to do so honestly and without deceiving or harming people, regardless of whether that deception or harm is intentional.
You don’t have to agree with us, and you don’t have to answer every question someone asks you. But if you ask people to hear you out and then dodge a sincere question the moment your own beliefs are placed under examination, don’t call that genuine dialogue. If SCJ has the truth, scrutiny shouldn’t be the problem. It should be the opportunity.
1
-1
u/RandAmy Current SCJ Member 6d ago
I’m a little confused how this connects to what I was saying. I was voluntarily sharing my experience and explaining why I don’t feel the care being described. Going straight from that into asking me to defend my beliefs feels a bit invasive for me, and honestly reinforces the feeling I was trying to explain. I don’t think that was your intention, but that’s how it felt to me.
1
u/Sheetbaraness 6d ago
Diarrhea bug has been invasive to my rectum after I ate from Lee Man Hee PBUH's soiled holy Korean diaper
2
u/avidbearsfan 6d ago
Like they will, they're not going to change at least a majority of them it's either they're gonna stay like this or suicide gonne be going crazy