There are numerous churches, religions and sects, all believing that their specific doctrine is the only correct one. In many cases there are only superficial differences between the beliefs of different churches, but they nevertheless believe that they are practicing the true faith. Criticism against certain sects is strong and intense and often aimed at proving that the target is in error. In such a way many critics strongly want the HOPCC exposed.
Even a rudimentary internet search will reveal several websites dedicated to the exposure of the House of Prayer Christian Church. There are even Twitter and Facebook groups dedicated to exposing the sect as evil, unchristian and cruel. In many cases those levelling the criticism were members of the House of Prayer at one time or family and friends of members.
One of the main themes of the criticisms levelled against the church is that it forces its members to donate all their possessions to the church, thereby leaving them utterly dependent upon the church. There are even some that say that certain members are required to quit their regular jobs. Once the members are totally dependent upon the church, they are easy to manipulate, or so the critics allege.
There are also serious criticisms regarding the recruitment practices of the House of Prayer. Some witnesses state that their children became members only to be indoctrinated and alienated from their family and loved ones. Young members are allegedly forbidden to have any contact with their parents, especially if the parents do not approve membership of the church. Parents also say that their children show disturbing behaviour once they become members.
Critics have not limited their efforts against the House Of Prayer to the publishing of reports and allegations. Several attempts have been made to convince the authorities to launch a full scale investigation into all aspects of the church. Those efforts were fruitless thus far because the authorities maintain that there is no evidence that any laws are being broken by the church or by its officials.
The official website of the church states clearly that everybody connected to their seminary are required to reject all affairs related to the secular world. Instead, they are required to direct all their efforts into spiritual growth, learning and the furthering of the church goals. Critics say that this statement clearly show that those members are not allowed to own anything.
In the meanwhile the church seems to maintain a dignified silence and they do not react. Their website contains several glowing testimonials but critics scoff at that, saying that members are manipulated into providing such positive testimonials. The church maintains that they simply require their members to spend time praying and attending services in order to achieve personal and spiritual growth.
Those defending the church point out that some of the criticism levelled against the church come perilously close to hate speech. Rude language and allegations bordering on slander are common. They maintain that this is a sure sign of envy and hatred and that most of the attacks are from disgruntled and envious previous members. Defenders of the church urge the public to see through these criticisms and to ignore unproven allegations.
Even a rudimentary internet search will reveal several websites dedicated to the exposure of the House of Prayer Christian Church. There are even Twitter and Facebook groups dedicated to exposing the sect as evil, unchristian and cruel. In many cases those levelling the criticism were members of the House of Prayer at one time or family and friends of members.
One of the main themes of the criticisms levelled against the church is that it forces its members to donate all their possessions to the church, thereby leaving them utterly dependent upon the church. There are even some that say that certain members are required to quit their regular jobs. Once the members are totally dependent upon the church, they are easy to manipulate, or so the critics allege.
There are also serious criticisms regarding the recruitment practices of the House of Prayer. Some witnesses state that their children became members only to be indoctrinated and alienated from their family and loved ones. Young members are allegedly forbidden to have any contact with their parents, especially if the parents do not approve membership of the church. Parents also say that their children show disturbing behaviour once they become members.
Critics have not limited their efforts against the House Of Prayer to the publishing of reports and allegations. Several attempts have been made to convince the authorities to launch a full scale investigation into all aspects of the church. Those efforts were fruitless thus far because the authorities maintain that there is no evidence that any laws are being broken by the church or by its officials.
The official website of the church states clearly that everybody connected to their seminary are required to reject all affairs related to the secular world. Instead, they are required to direct all their efforts into spiritual growth, learning and the furthering of the church goals. Critics say that this statement clearly show that those members are not allowed to own anything.
In the meanwhile the church seems to maintain a dignified silence and they do not react. Their website contains several glowing testimonials but critics scoff at that, saying that members are manipulated into providing such positive testimonials. The church maintains that they simply require their members to spend time praying and attending services in order to achieve personal and spiritual growth.
Those defending the church point out that some of the criticism levelled against the church come perilously close to hate speech. Rude language and allegations bordering on slander are common. They maintain that this is a sure sign of envy and hatred and that most of the attacks are from disgruntled and envious previous members. Defenders of the church urge the public to see through these criticisms and to ignore unproven allegations.
No comments:
Post a Comment