The Marks of a Cult*

[ann]

Thank You Don Has a plan, though clearly CSloan does not agree with me though perhaps like you say he is somewhat against the catholic church and may not realise the message that he is putting over in his posts. Sorry CSloan if you are female. Can an administrator check this thread please for external opinions. Sorry CSloan but if you are genuine and up front you will be happy for it to be checked and therefore can prove me wrong which I am happy to be proved wrong. 

[broach972]

Bottomline, the original post has nothing to do with defining cults.  Those are not marks of a cult.  It seems that many of those marks highlight differences between most Protestants and Catholics.  I see it for what it is.  I tried to stay away from this thread, but I am glad that some see it for what it is.

[HRoberson]

If you delete everything past "...jbeard" in the OP's link, you will find that jbeard is a bit, um....conservative and reactionary for my tastes.

I wouldn't take much of what he has to say very far.

But that's just my opinion; some of you might think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

[CSloan]

Bottomline, the original post has nothing to do with defining cults.  Those are not marks of a cult.  It seems that many of those marks highlight differences between most Protestants and Catholics.  I see it for what it is.  I tried to stay away from this thread, but I am glad that some see it for what it is.

I guess Ann's not the only one who seems to think the catholic church fits this bill.

[broach972]

Bottomline, the original post has nothing to do with defining cults.  Those are not marks of a cult.  It seems that many of those marks highlight differences between most Protestants and Catholics.  I see it for what it is.  I tried to stay away from this thread, but I am glad that some see it for what it is.

I guess Ann's not the only one who seems to think the catholic church fits this bill.

First of all CSloan, the Catholic Church is not a cult.  I very much disagree with the criteria set forth in the opening posts.  Most of those marks are way off.  However, most anti-Catholics, including yourself, have this impression of the Church.  What you have offered is more anti-Catholic junk disguised as "scholarly" analysis.  Quite frankly, you have zero credibility as long as you continue these tactics.  Then again, those who lack any substance or anything worthy to say will resort to things like the opening post.

[marc]

fwiw, this exact list (or something similar) has been posted before, I believe, without anyone thinking it was about the Catholic Church. Bad Christology has tended to be the focus of many of these discussions in the past.

[broach972]

Well, CSloan, let me ask the question directly.  Do you consider the Catholic Church to be a cult based on the criteria posed in the opening post?  Yes or no answer would be nice.  Please don't invoke the "strawman."

[DCR]

Well, CSloan, let me ask the question directly.  Do you consider the Catholic Church to be a cult based on the criteria posed in the opening post?  Yes or no answer would be nice.  Please don't invoke the "strawman."

*I think it would be best not to ask questions of this nature.

[DCR]

fwiw, this exact list (or something similar) has been posted before, I believe, without anyone thinking it was about the Catholic Church. Bad Christology has tended to be the focus of many of these discussions in the past.

I agree. 

I don't see that the OP is necessarily targeted toward the RCC, as some of the points don't apply to the RCC anyway (at least, as I understand it).  In fact, the only group that is mentioned by name is Mormonism. 

[Jimbob]

I've spent a fair amount of time studying cults and cultic practices and the list in the opening post ARE INDEED pretty standard cultic indicators from those who have "cult awareness" type ministries.

Here's the list I use when I'm teaching on the cults:

Bad Christology - if you get Jesus wrong, you can't be right about anything else. 

Exclusivism – the only group that's got it right

Extra-biblical revelation, that changes to suit the group's needs

Personality driven, frequently identifying a single person as "the prophet" - Joseph Smith, Jim Jones, L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Baker Eddy, Rev. Moon, David Koresh, etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

History twisting – making history up to support their claims

If either list makes anyone think their own group is being attacked, perhaps the place to look is their group, instead of impugning the motives of others.

I think that's fair enough (good to see you 'round).

[HRoberson]

The list is too vague, and fits jbeard's style of broad brush and generalizations. Sometimes we prove too much.

The Marks of a Cult* 

1. Extrabiblical Authority: All cults deny what God says in His Word as true. Cults have shifted their theological point of authority away from God's full and final written Word, the Bible, to their own unique, self-promoting opinions about the Bible; they generally will use parts of the Bible but will have their own unique scripture which is considered to be superior to the Bible. While some cult groups give token respect for the Bible and go through the motions of accepting the authority of Scripture, in reality, they honor the group's or leader's novel interpretation of Scripture as normative.

Like, say, the Nicene Creed?

2. Works Salvation/Legalism: Cults teach that eternal life depends upon something other than the Atonement; i.e., faith in the atoning, finished work of Christ on the cross is deemed not to be sufficient (usually replaced with human works and human responsibility). Rather than relying on the grace of God alone for salvation, the salvation message of the cults always boils down to required obedience to, or abstention from, certain obligations and practices (some even including obedience to the Old Testament law).

Like, say, repentence or baptism?

3. No Assurance of Salvation: The issue of a cult member's salvation is never settled, but is constantly affected by the changing circumstances of life; in this way, cult leaders are able to produce continued obligation and spiritual bondage, rather than spiritual freedom.

Like, say, denying the OSAS idea?

4. Guru-Type Leader/Modern Prophet: The cult leader is looked to as the infallible interpreter of Scripture, specially appointed by God to be a special saint, guru, or contemporary messiah, and thereby, has divine authority that must not be violated. Cultists almost always quote their leader rather than the Bible. The cult's adherents often expound the virtues of the founders and seek to cover the founder's sins and wickedness.

Like, say, the Pope, or another Patriarch?

5. Vacillating, Ambiguous Doctrines/Spiritual Deception: In order to gain favor with the public, and thereby aid in the recruitment of new members, cult "doctrine" tends to be characterized by many false or deceptive claims concerning the cult's true spiritual beliefs (e.g., Mormons are not quick to reveal their belief that God was a man, who has now become the God of planet Earth).

Like, say, whether Limbo is real or not?

6. Exclusivity from/Denunciation of Other Groups: Each cult group, regardless of what other doctrines are taught, will all have this one common idea -- "The Only True Church Syndrome." The members of each specific organization have been taught that their church, organization, or community, is the only true group and that all other groups are false. The group's leaders will explain that it is impossible to serve God without being a member of the specific group. Moreover, when the cult leader announces himself as the true "Messiah," all others are declared to be dishonest, deceitful, and deluded, and must be put down; alternative views are denounced as being satanic and corrupt. Persecution is welcomed, and even glorified in, as "evidence" that they are being persecuted for righteousness sake. Thus, if a member decides to leave the group, they have been told that they are not simply leaving an organization, but rather they are leaving God and His only true organization. Hence, for a member of a cult who has been in a group for any length of time, the action of leaving the group is much more difficult than what most Christians understand. To leave the group is, in the minds of the cult member, tantamount to leaving God.

Like, say, most mainline religions? As far as leaving a group being difficult, have we missed the thread, "Finally left a church?" Has no one heard of someone's grandmother being just beside herself when she finds out that someone has left the Catholic/Baptist/Christian Church?

7. Claims of Special Discoveries/Additional Revelation: Acceptance of new, contemporary, continual revelations that either deny the Bible or are allowed to explain it. The fundamental characteristic of Christianity is that it is historical, not dependent upon private knowledge and secret, unconfirmable relationships, while the almost universal basis of cult religion is the claimed exclusive revelation that one person has supposedly received. Rather than conforming to Biblical rules of evidence (2 Cor. 13:1), cult leader revelations almost always emanate from hallucinations, visions, dreams, private discoveries, etc. These new revelations often become codified as official written "scripture" of the cults (e.g., The Book of Mormon), and are considered as valid as that of the apostles (and even more relevant because they are given in these end times).

Like, say, Peter? (OK, that's a stretch).

8. Defective Christology: Cults always have a false view of the nature of the Person of Jesus Christ; a cult will usually deny the true deity of Christ, His true humanity, His true origin, or the true union of the two natures in one Person.

Like, say, some first millenium heretics? I'm glad someone has the origin and personal nature of Christ figured out.

9. Defective "Nature of Man": Most cults do not see man as an immortal being; instead they see him either as an animal without a soul or as a being which is being perfected to the point of becoming a god. They usually do not see man as a spirit clothed in a body of flesh awaiting the redemption of body and soul.

Is Man immortal? Is Fudge a cultist?

10. Out-Of-Context Scripture Use as Proof-Texts/Segmented Biblical Attention: Cults tend to focus on one verse or passage of the Bible to the exclusion of others, and without regard for the context in which Scripture is given (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:29 used by Mormons to justify baptism for the dead). In addition, cults have made an art form out of using Christian terminology, all the while pouring out their own meanings into the words.

Like, say, "Faith only?" Couldn't resist.

11. Erroneous Doctrines Concerning Life After Death and Retribution: Covering the gamut from soul sleep to annihilationism to purgatory to universalism to the progression to godhood, cults invariably deny the existence of a final judgment of, and a final "resting" place for, the unrighteous.

So Fudge is a cultist, as are most Catholics?

12. Entangling Organization Structure: The less truth a movement represents, the more highly it seems to have to organize itself; the absence of truth seems to make necessary the application of the bonds of fear. Cults often demand total commitment by their converts to an organizational involvement that entangles them in a complicated set of human restrictions, giving the impression of passionate and often irrational devotion to a cause.

Jim Jones didn't seem to have much organization. Well, except in the poison Kool-aid department. 

13. Financial Exploitation: The cultic practitioner strongly implies that money contributed to the cause will earn the contributor numerous gifts, powers, and abilities, and in many cases, outright salvation.

"Give with a cheerful heart, because God loves a cheerful giver."

14. Pseudomystical/Spiritistic/Occultic Influence: Occult influence is many times found in either the origin of the group and/or in its current practices.

Like, say, praying to some diety? Or founding a religioni on some transient rabbi?

From: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/marksof.htm[/i]

[Jimbob]

fwiw, this exact list (or something similar) has been posted before, I believe, without anyone thinking it was about the Catholic Church. Bad Christology has tended to be the focus of many of these discussions in the past.

I agree. 

I don't see that the OP is necessarily targeted toward the RCC, as some of the points don't apply to the RCC anyway (at least, as I understand it).  In fact, the only group that is mentioned by name is Mormonism. 

Oddly, most of the list does fit a mysterious new electric service company in town.  Seriously. 

[marc]

Well, I warned you all against 4-H on another thread!


Seriously, for those who were wondering, the reason I bumped the "Catholic/Protestant" stickied thread is that I think we've reached a point of saturation and emotions are starting to run off and drip all over the board, and I'm afraid they're going to short out my computer.

Recent threads are causing people to take things the worst way possible.  As I mentioned earlier, we have had this same discussion before with no reference being made to Catholicism at all. 

To switch metaphors (the other one was a bit labored anyway), I'd advise cooling off a bit before posting more.

[broach972]

If either list makes anyone think their own group is being attacked, perhaps the place to look is their group, instead of impugning the motives of others.

Give me a break.  This is pretty disingenuous.  I have been around long enough to know what "baiting" is.  Granted I took it.  But as a Catholic, I know the junk that is often spread about us and those "marks" are nothing new.  However, one gets tired of it from time to time.  Excuse me if I seem a little sensitive but CSloan has developed quite a reputation here for his anti-Catholic positions.

[Jimbob]

I should probably let OD speak for himself, but honestly, broach, I think you're taking that the wrong way. 

[broach972]

I'm not baiting anyone.  The list is a reliable, fairly standard checklist of cultic indicators.  If you don't believe me, google "cult awareness ministry" and see what you get.

As has been said, when the list or one very similar was posted in a thread on Mormonism, no one jumped up and down in righteous indignation, or said it was "too vague," or considered it an attack.

And again, if someone looks at the list and says, "Hey!  That sounds like my group!"  I submit that the problem may not be with the list.

CSloan was the one "baiting."  He knew what he was doing when he posted that thread.

Besides, I didn't look at that list and say "Hey!  That sounds like my group!"  I looked at it and said, "Hey!  This is what most ignorant people believe and say about my group!  Here we go again!"  Big difference.

[Jimbob]

Btw....what's the * for?

[yogi bear]

Well then we have a lot in common because  I looked at it and said, "Hey!  This is what most ignorant people believe and say about my group! So maybe they were not talking about your group but was instead referring to mine.

[James Rondon]

Some of you have branded CSloan as "anti-catholic". Just an FYI, the majority of posters on GCM would hardly be considered "pro-catholic", or more particularly, "pro-Roman Catholicism". If you're looking for a "Roman Catholic" discussion forum, you really need to look elsewhere.

[HRoberson]

As has been said, when the list or one very similar was posted in a thread on Mormonism, no one jumped up and down in righteous indignation, or said it was "too vague," or considered it an attack.

And again, if someone looks at the list and says, "Hey!  That sounds like my group!"  I submit that the problem may not be with the list.

The list is too vague. There's room to condemn just about anyone I want to disagree with. Whether it's normal or not doesn't address whether it's vague. Sorry I didn't disagree with the list when it was in a Mormon thread. Perhaps I ignored that thread all together. But, my failure in that regard doesn't affect the (in-)validity of the list as posted.
In general, you are correct that if we fit a defintion, then perhaps its us that need some reflection. However, that requires first that we have a definition that's worth using. In this instance, I don't think we do.

[James Rondon]

you are correct that if we fit a defintion, then perhaps its us that need some reflection.

Indeed.

[HRoberson]

This guy claims to be a Cult Awareness Center: http://www.bloomington.in.us/~lgthscac/

So what?

[HRoberson]

Here's another list, from Watchman Fellowship...

They're all Baptists from Alabama!

They probably think Baptist theology is it!

How much stock can we put in what they have to say!??

How's that for ad hominem?

[marc]

ad hominem?

That would be a better title for this thread.

[James Rondon]

I guess there is no such thing as a cult?

I guess it all is a matter of subjectivity?...

Maybe we should invite edpobre into this discussion, in order to consider his definition?

[HRoberson]

I guess there is no such thing as a cult?

I guess it all is a matter of subjectivity?...

Maybe we should invite edpobre into this discussion, in order to consider his definition?

There probably are cults, and yes to some degree, it is subjective. However, the list provided in the OP does not adequately define cult. The defiinition requires more specificity than the OP provides, and in some cases, the OP seems a bit too restrictive. Thus my observation concerning knowing the personal nature of Christ. How much is too much? How little is too little?

[ann]

Cults.  It is very very difficult to leave a cult and sometimes your lives could be threatend if you leave.

It is very very very easy to leave the Catholic Church if you want to! You simply stop going.

The Catholic Church is not a cult!

[CSloan]

Cults.  It is very very difficult to leave a cult and sometimes your lives could be threatend if you leave.

It is very very very easy to leave the Catholic Church if you want to! You simply stop going.

The Catholic Church is not a cult!

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." ~Shakespeare

[ann]

Have I touched on a nerve CSloan

[spurly]

How did this discussion of cults turn into a discussion of the Catholic Church?  I don't believe that was the intent of the opening post at all!

[CSloan]

How did this discussion of cults turn into a discussion of the Catholic Church?  I don't believe that was the intent of the opening post at all!

Thank you Spurly, that was not my intention to drag catholicism in to discussion. I felt that the list was good for examination and had some very sound points to consider. But people have since used this thread to accuse me of being anti-catholic, baiting, and being generally underhanded.

Quite frankly, I'm offended at the spirit in which I have been received.

[ann]

On thinking about it I am with Charley on this one and I don't like it either.  I am wondering why CSLoan needed to start this thread? Was it something that was said on another.  I remember some sort of confession coming from CSLoan about way he had handled the Catholic discussions?  Is this something stemmed from that in which case I really don't like this and hope the moderators do something about this one. I feel sure that CSLoan is trying to undermine the Catholic Church in some way. I apologise now if I am wrong but this is what I think this is the subtle message of the board and yet we have all been told not to judge others and that the Catholic Church is Christian. I really am not happy with the topic of cults and hope someone is going through it with a very fine comb and drawing out all possibilities it hasn't any subtle messages against the Catholic Church!

I admitt it was me that said all this but read it through once again, CSloan because I have indeed apologised if I am wrong but if you haven't read this post fully then it will be not much good attracting your attention to this apology.  You can keep harping on about how you have been wronged but is that the christian thing to do?  I will apologise and it feels wierd because I said initially I could well be wrong.  All you have done CSloan is take advantage of me being wrong and homed in on it rather than seeing that I am trying to also say if I am wrong then I am sorry.

[yogi bear]

Just because some think one is a cult and the other is not does not make it true. Everyone has v their opinion and that is just what they are opinions that one holds to. I have not got a grasp on the definition of cults as to the way everyone is using it. It seems to me that the real term would been used as such as Jonestown and Koresh and the likes of them. But the way we are going at it now seems like that we can lump any division that does not agree with ours into such a term. I just do not see any division fitting the terms as found in the Kore sh or Jonestown event. I do not see any division having the followers to commit the acts as the real cult calls into play. Maybe I am just to unlearned to know the difference.

[CSloan]

On thinking about it I am with Charley on this one and I don't like it either.  I am wondering why CSLoan needed to start this thread? Was it something that was said on another.  I remember some sort of confession coming from CSLoan about way he had handled the Catholic discussions?  Is this something stemmed from that in which case I really don't like this and hope the moderators do something about this one. I feel sure that CSLoan is trying to undermine the Catholic Church in some way. I apologise now if I am wrong but this is what I think this is the subtle message of the board and yet we have all been told not to judge others and that the Catholic Church is Christian. I really am not happy with the topic of cults and hope someone is going through it with a very fine comb and drawing out all possibilities it hasn't any subtle messages against the Catholic Church!

I admitt it was me that said all this but read it through once again, CSloan because I have indeed apologised if I am wrong but if you haven't read this post fully then it will be not much good attracting your attention to this apology.  You can keep harping on about how you have been wronged but is that the christian thing to do?  I will apologise and it feels wierd because I said initially I could well be wrong.  All you have done CSloan is take advantage of me being wrong and homed in on it rather than seeing that I am trying to also say if I am wrong then I am sorry.

Ann,

Your not the only one who made accusations. But your apology didn't stop you from continuing to make accusations even after I told you it wasn't my intentions, did it?

Thank You Don Has a plan, though clearly CSloan does not agree with me though perhaps like you say he is somewhat against the catholic church and may not realise the message that he is putting over in his posts. Sorry CSloan if you are female. Can an administrator check this thread please for external opinions. Sorry CSloan but if you are genuine and up front you will be happy for it to be checked and therefore can prove me wrong which I am happy to be proved wrong. 

You just apologize and continue to accuse.

[zoonance]

Just because some think one is a cult and the other is not does not make it true. Everyone has v their opinion and that is just what they are opinions that one holds to. I have not got a grasp on the definition of cults as to the way everyone is using it. It seems to me that the real term would been used as such as Jonestown and Koresh and the likes of them. But the way we are going at it now seems like that we can lump any division that does not agree with ours into such a term. I just do not see any division fitting the terms as found in the Kore sh or Jonestown event. I do not see any division having the followers to commit the acts as the real cult calls into play. Maybe I am just to unlearned to know the difference.

you are quite learned and don't need all the fancy verbage needed to prove any point.  You have eyes to see and ears to hear and I appreciate your insight bvaug