English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I know that some people say that some reglions are actually cults like Jehovah’s Witnesses.

2007-12-09 23:18:07 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Some people believe that Scientology is a cult. Germany is talking about banding it in Germany as a cult.

2007-12-09 23:23:49 · update #1

29 answers

The term "cult" is an insult; the term "religion" is not.

Jehovah's Witnesses are Christians.

Trinitarians try to use the term "cult" like a sledgehammer to obliterate any thinking analysis of what the supposed "cultist" actually believes. Trinitarians embrace a bizarre, non-etymological, quite arbitrary definition of the term "cult" which includes anyone who does not believe that Jesus is God Himself, rather than the Son of God. Interestingly, pagans in the first century slandered Christ's followers with the insulting term "Atheist" (!) because the Christians had a somewhat different idea from the pagans about the nature of God.

Jehovah's Witnesses teach that no salvation occurs without Christ, that accepting Christ's sacrifice is a requirement for true worship, that every prayer must acknowledge Christ, that Christ is the King of God's Kingdom, that Christ is the head of the Christian congregation, that Christ is immortal and above every creature, even that Christ was the 'master worker' in creating the universe! Secular authorities in academia and government routinely acknowledge that Jehovah's Witnesses are a Christian religion. With more than 16 million associating with Jehovah's Witnesses, the term "cult" seems very out of place in a fair discussion of Jehovah's Witnesses. Jehovah's Witnesses are Christians.

Sadly, Trinitarians seem more interested in perpetuating their human traditions, Greek philosophy, and Babylonish fetishes rather than reasonably examining the Scriptural definition of "Christian". In fact, the bible most closely associates being "Christian" with preaching about Christ and Christ's teachings. Review all the times the bible uses the term "Christian" and note that the context connects the term with:
"declaring the good news"
'teaching quite a crowd'
'open eyes, turn from dark to light'
"uttering sayings of truth"
"persuade"
"keep on glorifying"

(Acts 11:20-26) [The early disciples of Jesus] began talking to the Greek-speaking people, declaring the good news of the Lord Jesus... and taught quite a crowd, and it was first in Antioch that the disciples were by divine providence called Christians.

(Acts 26:17-28) [Jesus said to Paul] I am sending you, to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light and from the authority of Satan to God... Paul said: “I am not going mad, Your Excellency Festus, but I am uttering sayings of truth and of soundness of mind. ...Do you, King Agrippa, believe the Prophets? I know you believe.” But Agrippa said to Paul: “In a short time you would persuade me to become a Christian.”

(1 Peter 4:14-16) If you are being reproached for the name of Christ, you are happy... But if he suffers as a Christian, let him not feel shame, but let him keep on glorifying God in this name


So why do anti-Witnesses try to hijack the term "Christian" and hide its Scriptural implications? Because anti-Witnesses recognize that it is the preaching work that makes it clear that the relatively small religion of Jehovah's Witnesses are by far the most prominent followers of Christ:

(Matthew 28:19,20) Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded


Learn more!
http://watchtower.org/e/20000622/
http://watchtower.org/e/ti/index.htm?article=article_04.htm

2007-12-12 06:12:56 · answer #1 · answered by achtung_heiss 7 · 0 1

A cult is a religion that doesn't control enough money to buy, or for some other reason doesn't have, political influence.

Political influence conveys "respectability."

Then you're a "religion," not a "cult."

Look at David Koresh and the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas. Leaving aside the gun charges and child abuse accusations, NEITHER of which were ever proven, their doctrines were not very unusual. On any Sunday you can hear sermons with similar concepts in hundreds of churches across the USA.

But the Branch Davidians were politically isolated, and so were described in the media and in government statements as a "cult." Once you are called a "cult," you can be made a target.

This made it a simple matter for the ATF to shoot into their buildings from helicopters before serving any warrants, even though this is forbidden by both federal and Texas state law. The FBI had shut off their electricity, and knew they were using propane burners for heat and lanterns for light. So when the FBI pumped flammable tear gas into buildings where they knew there were open flames, almost a hundred Branch Davidians, including children, were burned alive.

Then, since they were classified as a "cult," media statements were broadcast that they "set themselves on fire."

Compare this treatment with that given, for instance, to the Catholic Church and its criminal conspiracies to cover up child abuse by pedophile priests, or of "mainstream" Protestant evangelists using church money to hire hitmen or for mansions and prostitutes.

"Respectable" churches get trials, damages awards, chances to argue on television, and politicians vying for their endorsement. "Cults" get burned alive in their homes and flimsy frame church buildings, which are then called "fortified compounds," and they are then blamed for their own deaths.

There's very little difference in doctrines, but a heck of a difference in treatment.


EDIT

Hey, "Concept Styles"? A foolish question, maybe, but... what's a "clementine"?

Never mind, I googled it. It's a citrus fruit, like a tangerine or mandarin orange. I get it.

2007-12-09 23:43:08 · answer #2 · answered by Dont Call Me Dude 7 · 0 0

A layman's definition of a cult is a team of human beings who have faith in or do some thing diverse than I do. yet heavily, once you combine 3 tenets you create an somewhat risky and unsafe project: one million) the team is extremely secretive 2) in elementary terms individuals can understand all of the team's ideals and practices 3) as quickly as a member joins, there is not any thank you to leave no longer attempting to declare any specific team does one million) by way of 3) above, in simple terms defining what a cult incredibly is.

2016-11-14 07:13:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Honestly, according to dictionaries, most any group constitutes a cult. I am a Christian, one of Jehovah's Witnesses. On Y!A the general rule for what is a cult seems to be That group doesn't believe as I do, or at least that's what someone else says, so they must be cultists.

2007-12-10 15:07:02 · answer #4 · answered by Ish Var Lan Salinger 7 · 2 0

A cult is a religion that wants to kill you, mentally and bodily. Religion depends on who they are. Christians are 80% pagans; the 20% are the true ones. The others are false and blind leading the blind. Islam is a question mark yet. Sum all that up, I am happy who I am.......A Believer in God Almighty, Christ Jesus (begotten son), and the Holy Spirit. With the 3 Divines, I don't need anyone else to mislead me to damnation.

2007-12-10 12:17:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A cult is an authoritarian group that uses manipulative tactics to get and keep members. It is often a religious group, but does not have to be. There are also political and psychotherapy cults, for example.

Cults are often confused with "heresies" but these are really two different things. Whether a group is a cult or not depends on whether it uses manipulative practices, judged by psychologically-based critera such as these:
Lifton's Eight Criteria of Thought Reform
http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/lifton_robert_thoughtreform.htm
The ABCDEF
http://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html

Whether a group is a heresy or not is judged by doctrine, NOT whether it uses manpulative techniques. Thus, cults and heresies are NOT the same.

Heretical groups *can* be cults, but they might also not be. Likewise, cults *might* be heresies, but they might also not be. It is in fact entirely possible for a completely non-heretical group to use tactics that mark it clearly as a cult.

Any religious group may or may not be a cult, just like they may or may not be a heresy.

Each individual group's practices need to be judged independently using the same set of criteria when making the determination about whether they are a cult or not. It's not possible to write off an entire group (such as "all of Christianity" or "all of Buddhism") as cultic because different groups within those religions have very different practices. It is only possible to determine that an entire group is a cult if all of the individual "churches," "halls," "centers" or other divisions within the group use the same techniques and are under the control of a centralized authority, whether that consists of one person or a group.

2007-12-09 23:21:03 · answer #6 · answered by kriosalysia 5 · 2 4

A religion is set practices, rites and beliefs coupled with the worship of God(s) or Higher Beings. A cult is group with a distinct following of an ideal or person(s). There can be religious cults which incorporate aspects of a religion however their interpretation differs largely from the mainstream as well as having sinister elements. However a cult need not be religious or can simply be sinister or the glorification of one individual and the devotion to them.

2007-12-09 23:22:51 · answer #7 · answered by A-chan 4 · 1 2

I am associated with JW's. And yeah some say that because it is a modern religion even if it was started in the 1800's.

Anyway, cults are usually lead by a man, and his ideas and his riturals and stuff like that. Like the Waco TX case, a man lead several people in a religion that incorportated teaching that were not in harmony with the bible.

Religion is uaually a traditional belief that can go back thousands of years. It too is associated with religious practices, chants, and symbols like statues, use of beads or flags.

Go back to JW's, yes they are a newer religion compared to the Catholic's, but they are not lead by any man, they do have a group of persons that makes decisions, but it is done by scriptural backing, with several bible verses to back up any teachings, not just one scriptureal that can be mis-read, and they acknowledge that Jesus is the King, not themselves. Also as time goes on, and things unfold in our time, the Bible is becoming more clear in what mankind needs to understand. So they do make minor adjustment in their teachings not to mislead, but again, as things go on, there are better explanations of prophercy.

2007-12-09 23:31:19 · answer #8 · answered by fire 5 · 2 1

There's no practical difference. Cult is simply a pejorative term for religion, and as such it's typically only applied to religions with small enough followings and/or ridiculous enough beliefs that people aren't overly worried about offending them.

2007-12-09 23:36:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Almost all breakaway sects are regarded as cults until their membership grows to a reasonable size --- at which point they become accepted as a religion.

If a breakaway sect has an unusual teaching it is always regarded as a cult no matter how large it grows.

2007-12-09 23:25:17 · answer #10 · answered by youngmoigle 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers