[Rhapsody]

What will people think up with next? - strange

Church members tattoo 666 on body; church or cult?

Pastor claims to be Christ & Anti-Christ.... and states there is no Satan or Sin.

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/2qqw7b

.................................. YOU DECIDE!!

[bebop]

wow! now that is scarey stuff there!

[moodyblu]

What do you think?
2nd Corinthians6 verses14-16
!st Timothy 4 verses1-2
Ephesians 6 verse 12.....
m.b.

what is the difference between a church and a cult?

(seriously)

?

[Rhapsody]

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
alexandra_k said:
what is the difference between a church and a cult?

(seriously)

?

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">


CHURCH: a church is an association of people who share a particular belief system.

.... usually within religion and with God / Christ.

CULT: a cult is a cohesive group of people (sometimes a relatively small and recently founded religious movement, sometimes numbering in the hundreds of thousands) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be far outside the mainstream, sometimes reaching the point of a taboo.

.... usually far from the understanding of the Bible and/ or most People.

[Rhapsody]

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
moodyblu said:
What do you think?
2nd Corinthians6 verses14-16
!st Timothy 4 verses1-2
Ephesians 6 verse 12.....
m.b.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I personally say....................... CULT and that is probably why I wanted to share it with all the believers here, as to share what is taking place within this world - TODAY!
... a sign of the ending times / last days.

LoVe,
Rhapsody -

[Rhapsody]

AND.... I personally feel that the 666 is not an actual number that is imprinted upon the actual fore-head of a person, but rather that of a number that a person is given that will enable them to buy or sell in the end of times - that which is needed to survive.

Something like a Social Security Number of a Credit Card Number.... or maybe even that of a ID Chip that is placed under the skin - like the type of chip that is being used in animals and some military personnel.

LoVe,
Rhapsody -

................................ What do others THINK about the # 666 - care to chat about it? - I would love to.

yes, i'm aware of current definition...

but when it comes to taking a particular group of people...

and deciding whether they belong in the 'cult' or 'religion' basket...

how do we decide?

seems to me that if an organisation (arguably) meets one of those definitions they will just as arguably meet the other...

i'm not trying to be smart or sarcastic or anything...

but i fail to grasp the difference.

unless it is recency.

in which case...

mormons are more recent than christians
and christians are more recent than jews

so mormons are more cult-like than christians
and christians are more cult-like than jews
and mormons are more cult-like than jews
(by transitivity)
hindu religion is pretty old...

(my point is surely age isn't going to help)

my other point is that while the beliefs might seem all find and dandy WITHIN a particular religion they often seem quite bizzarre from OUTSIDE the religion:

e.g., 'a ufo will come and take us to heaven'
'i am literally drinking the blood of christ'
etc etc...

did you get that idea from Barry Smith?
i remember when he came to our church...
everybody loves a conspiracy ;-)

that being said... given the amount of credit card fraud etc etc etc wouldn't a little microchip under the skin make a great deal of sense? i'm not sure whether it will happen... mostly because of human rights groups etc. but it does make sense. personally i think forehead is more likely than right arm for the reason that you can lose an arm and still be fairly much okay. lose your forehead on the other hand (har de har har) and losing your microchip will be the least of your problems ;-)

[(JD)]

The definition and use of the word "cult" has changed since the early church of (jewish) Christians, remember.

[Rhapsody]

A cult is usually created from "one persons belief" that then becomes a church (by name) after it gains followers (still of the minority) and not that of Religion that involves God / Christ - as we all know from the BIBLE....

And... NO - I did not get my belief of the number 666 from Barry Smith, rather I came about that thought process from my own understanding of the Bible combined with the Technology of today.

Plus... I do not see Jews or Mormons as a CULT, but rather as a religious group / church that see matters concerning God and Redemption in a different light.... as do the Catholic and Baptist. (etc)

LoVe,
Rhapsody -

hmm.

so when jesus came along and said he was the son of god...

and gains followers...

that is a religion

whereas when my uncle did that...

(as he did)

that...

is a cult?

(what is the difference?)

(my point is that it seems to be whether you consider yourself inside / outside, or possibly politically incorrect)

;-)

hindu?
buddist?
islamic?

cult or religion?

how about the different sects within???

(i have trouble seeing the difference)

[spiritual_emergency]

An article you may find informative...

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>

MOTIVATIONS FOR JOINING

People who join cults do so for two principal reasons: (1) They want to lead a meaningful, spiritual life and (2) they want to feel protected, cared for, and guided by someone who knows what to do in a confusing world. The first motive is conscious and laudable; the second is unconscious or not recognized for what it is. Therein lies the problem: The wish to have a perfect parent and a loving; supportive group lies concealed in the psyche of even the most outwardly independent person. When the opportunity arises to gratify that wish, it powerfully influences judgment and perception and paves the way for exploitation by a cult.

CULT BEHAVIOR IN NORMAL SOCIETY

Just as it is important to have a means of judging a spiritual teacher, it also is important for the ex-cult member and the therapist to be able to answer the more general question: "Is this group a cult?" Patients need to be able to answer that question to avoid making the same mistake again, and therapists are likely to be asked that question by a worried parent or spouse. Usually, the group in question has obvious cult trappings, but society abounds with groups and organizations that appear normal but have the potential for cultlike behavior: large corporations, political groups, professional organizations, government bodies, and established religions. These sectors of normal society seldom are thought to share characteristics with The People's Temple or the less dramatic groups such as the Moonies and the Krishna devotees collecting money in airports, however, careful study of cults reveals four basic cult behaviors that occur to varying degrees in almost all groups, including those that do not have a strange appearance or engage in bizarre behavior. Identifying these basic behaviors permits one to replace the question, "Is this group a cult?" with the more practical one, "To what extent is cult behavior present?" The latter question is more useful because in the field of the transpersonal, as elsewhere, there is a continuum of groups ranging from the most benign and least cultlike to the most malignant and destructive.

THE FOUR BASIC CULT BEHAVIORS

#1: Compliance With the Group
Everybody is concerned with how he or she is viewed by the people whose opinions matter to, us:, our "reference group." No matter how, outwardly independent and nonconformist we may be, there is, usually a, group of people who share our values and whose approval we want. Membership, in this group is signaled by conformity in dress, behavior, and speech. ...

The essential aim … is to attain security through and have its members protected by one individual. It assumes that this is why the group has met. The members act as if they know nothing, as if they are inadequate and immature creatures. Their behavior implies that the leader, by contrast, is omnipotent and omniscient.

#2: Dependence on a Leader
Leaders draw a power from their followers’ wish for an ideal parent, a wish that is latent in all adults no matter what kind of parent they had. Although cult leaders may be charismatic, they need not be as long as they are believed by the group members to possess superior powers and secrets. Cult leaders are authoritarian, encouraging dependence and discouraging autonomy. Obedience and loyalty are rewarded, and critical thinking is punished. Furthermore, to enhance dependency on the leader, pair bonding is discouraged. The leader must come first; family and lovers come last. The disruption of intimate relationships is accomplished by a variety of means: enforced chastity, separation of parents from children, arranged marriages, long separations, promiscuity, or sexual relations with the leader. All these aspects are counter to healthy leadership, which fosters growth, independence, and mature relationships and has as its aim that the followers will eventually achieve an eye-level relationship with the leader.

#3: Dissent
Dissent threatens the group fantasy that the members are being protected and rewarded by a perfect, enlightened leader who can do no wrong. The security provided by that fantasy is the basic attraction that keeps members in the cult despite highly questionable actions by the leader. Questioning the fantasy threatens that security, and for this reason, active dissent is seldom encouraged. To the contrary, dissenters are often declared to be in the grip of Satan. Sometimes they are scapegoated, and hidden, unconscious anger toward the leader is released against the dissenter. Almost all groups derive security from their shared beliefs and readily regard dissenters as irritations, to be gotten rid of. Nevertheless, the mark of a healthy group is a tolerance for dissent and a recognition of its vital role in keeping the group sane. Paranoia develops and grandiosity flourishes when dissent is eliminated and a group isolates itself from outside influence. As recent cult disasters have shown us, grandiose and paranoid cult leaders often self-destruct, taking their group with them.

#4: Devaluing the Outsider
What good is being in a group if membership does not convey some special advantage? In spiritual groups, the members are likely to believe that they have the inside track to enlightenment, to being "saved," or to finding God because of the special sanctity and, spiritual power of the leader. It follows that they must be superior to people outside the group: It is they, the converts, who have the leader's blessing and approval. Devaluation can be detected in the pity or “compassion” they may feel for those outside. This devaluation becomes most marked in the case of someone who elects to leave the group and is thereby considered “lost,” if not damned. The more such devaluation takes place, and the more the group separates itself from the outside world, the greater the danger of cult pathology.

Devaluing of the outsider is part and parcel of everyday life. Depending on which group we designate as the outsider, our scorn may be directed at “liberals,” “Republicans,” “blacks,” “Jews,” “yuppies,” or “welfare bums”: however the outsider is designated. Such disidentification can authorize unethical, mean, and destructive behavior against the outsider, behavior that otherwise would cause guilt for violating ethical norms.

Devaluing the outsider reassures the insider that he or she is good, special, and deserving, unlike the outsider. Such a belief is a distortion of reality; if one considers the different circumstances of each person’s development and life context, one is hard put to judge another person to be intrinsically inferior to oneself. Certainly, actions can be judged, but human beings are one species, at eye level with each other.

Source: Treating Former Members of Cults - Arthur J. Deikman


</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

[Perna]

Interesting thoughts Alexandra :-) I guess I'd want to know how consistent the actions were with what was being preached. If I start hearing "Sermons on the Mount" and the leader trying to get away from all the people so He can rest, then I might look into the religion. But taking only the "believers" away to private places and otherwise being around them too much, not engaging with critics, living a different life than the surrounding people, etc. that would be red flags for me. The Mormons who still practice polygamy strike me as a cult and the whole Mormon religion which doesn't take responsibility for working on straightening that out (since they started it) makes me think their beginnings were less than "religious;" a true "religion" in my book doesn't seek to be secretive or exclusionary.

[Rapunzel]

Perna, as a Mormon, may I respectfully insert a correction on what we practice and believe. Mormons do not practice polygamy. We believe in honoring the law of the land. It is part of our history, and is also part of the history of all Judeo-Christians since polygamy was practiced in the Old Testament, most notably by the kings, David and Solomon. But Mormons today have monogomous marriages and would be excommunicated if they married a second spouse (I know one who did, and was).

However, there is a splinter group that still practices polygamy, and since they broke off from us they still resemble us in some ways. They do practice polygamy, and in ways that are very harmful. We are not able to do anything about their beliefs and practices above what the law or anyone else can do, since they do not follow our leaders and prophet. Since they are located around Utah (often on the borders so that they can run into another state if the police go after them), the officers enforcing the law when people from that group are arrested are often Mormons. So we are doing what we can about a problem that exists near us but pertains to another group, not us.

[Rhapsody]

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
alexandra_k said:
hmm.

so when jesus came along and said he was the son of god...

and gains followers...

that is a religion

whereas when my uncle did that...

(as he did)

that...

is a cult?

(what is the difference?)

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Hmm -

I would say the difference is that PROOF has been given and "felt by many" to the EXISTENCE of GOD / CHRIST.... where as there are usually only a small amount of people that follow other people claiming today that they are the TRUE CHRIST - and usually with out PROOF.

LoVe,
Rhapsody -

P.S.

It is like being YOU or ME.....
there can only be ONE of US and if any one else was to claim to ME or YOU, then they would be a FAKE, and if they pushed their claim as FACT and GAINED followers then it would become a CULT.

[nothemama8]

the main diffrence with a cult is the ppl follow the cult leaders basic rule of orders. with Churches the ppl share a fellowship they would never give up there independence or die for the leader as with some cults ask there followers to do this, this is my opinion also I had been involved in a cult back in the 70's

[SeptemberMorn]

The difference between Jesus saying He is the Son of God and your uncle doing the same thing is that Jesus backed up what He said by performing miracles. I'm sure your uncle couldn't do that. What did your uncle use as his basis for his claim?

[SeptemberMorn]

1 Timothy 4:1-2 (New International Version)

1 Timothy 4
Instructions to Timothy

1The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.

Revelation 13:16-18 (New International Version)

16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

18This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.

Revelation 14:8-10 (New International Version)

8A second angel followed and said, "Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great, which made all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries."

9A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, 10he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb.

[SeptemberMorn]

Contemporary Cults

Cults are as old as recorded history, but contemporary interest in cults became amplified during the late 1960s and early 1970s as numbers of educated middle class youths abandoned traditional religions and embraced beliefs and practices that were either culturally unprecedented (Eastern religions) or seemed to be throwbacks to an earlier era (Fundamentalist Christianity). During this period, young people were increasingly found living in various types of religious communes and engaging in unconventional behavior, such as speaking in tongues (glossolalia), faith healing, meditating (often under the tutelage of a spiritual leader or guru), and following leaders that conventional society tended to look upon with suspicion and distaste. Interest in cults turned to a combination of fascination and revulsion upon the mass suicide of the Jones cult in November 1978.

Modern cults come in a bewildering variety of ideologies, practices, and forms of leadership. They range from those adhering to a sort of biblical Christianity to those seeking satori (sudden enlightenment) via the pursuits of Zen Buddhism. Some cults have a flexible, functional leadership, such as many groups in the Charismatic Movement emanating from the mainline Christian religions, and others have mentors who control and orchestrate cult events, such as the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, leader of the Unification church. Some Hindu gurus, such as Bhagwan Shree Rajineesh of the Rajineeshee sect have been believed by their followers to be living embodiments of God.

hmm... i still fail to see the difference...

once again, i will re-iterate that i'm not at all trying to be sarcastic or smart... but i still struggle with the difference.

where is this coming from?

part of my worry...

delusion. the DSM defines delusion as 'a radically false belief based on incorret inference held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary that is different to what others believe' (roughly that is the definition).

the definition has been questioned on every substantial point that it makes. it is arguable / controversial whether delusions must be:

1) false (if you have the delusion your partner is unfaithful then eventually this might lead in your partner being unfaithful though you can develop the delusion before they are unfaithful and even when they are unfaithful this would still (arguably) be a delusion
2) beliefs (other candidates include 'imaginings mis-identified as beliefs' or other such states)
3) inferences (e.g., they might be given on the basis of a cerebral injury to a particular area such as face recognition in instances where people claim that people who are known to them are replaced by impostors because they literally can't affectively recognise them)
4) inferences that are different from the inferences of non-delusional subjects (if the content is given by experience then no inference is necessary)
5) held despite incontrovertiable evidence (what counts as 'incontrovertiable'? the cogito? nothing (much) is incontrovertatible in life...)
6) held despite the beliefs of others (surely a mass cult counts as a mass delusion)

in the face of the 6th point (in particular) there IS a lot of controversy over how much religious beliefs just are mass delusions.

for example:

in the catholic faith part of the belief of the religion is that literally the communion wine JUST IS transformed into the blood of christ. so people who partake in communion are LITERALLY drinking the blood of christ.

how is this belief different to 'my wife has been replaced by an impostor'?

and there are other religious beliefs (of all the major religions) of course.

is the only identifying characteristic between a cult (where there can be mass delusion) and a religion (where the DSM says that religious beliefs DO NOT count as delusional) a function of such facts as:

1) how many followers believe it. e.g., not terribly many are convinced that ufo's will take them to heaven whereas there are many more catholics (where the official party line of the religion is that they are literally drinking the blood of christ)
2) how recent the movement is. e.g., the older the more it is a 'religion' and the more recent the more it is a 'cult' (hence can be delusional)

note:

one can't cite the bible to defend that the bible is the word of god (compared to words of a cult) because the argument would have to run like this

1) the bible is the word of god (how do i know this)
______________________________________________________
2) i know the bible is the word of god because the bible tells me so

why would someone accept 2 if i don't accept 1 already?
and why would i accept 1 if i don't accept 2?

how about the hindu bible?
or the many other bibles that are out there?
how about manuscripts that say the ufo's will come from heaven and take us up to it?
how about the doctrines of the church of the flying spaghetti monster?

i don't understand the difference between a cult and a religion.
and i don't understand the difference between cult beliefs and religious beliefs and delusional beliefs.

that doesn't mean that there isn't a difference, of course...

but this is something that is currently a matter of controversy...

if people can think of a relevant difference then i would be really very interested in that.

sure, cults are sense-making things...
but then so are religions...

i guess i'm still failing to grasp the difference...

quite genuinely...

(and this is in part why the DSM is considered to have 'arbitary' exclusion criteria. and it is also why there is current debate as to whether religious belief counts as a delusion. i've said this before... but i guess i didn't make clear that i was really very serious with that comment and that... this is why)

[(JD)]

One of the differences in the "cult" of today and what historians declared and use the word which then meant something different than the cult of today is the evidence of a FALSE GOSPEL.

This particular case, as with Jim Jones, proves it is a cult because he has taken the truth of the Gospel of Christ and perverted it... making the gathering of those believers (his church) a CULT...and no longer an accepted belief according to the truths of the Bible.

[nothemama8]

the cult I was in used there followers to raise money on the street to pay for the leaders homes , food , cars , etc. we also had to give our own money to them. they also believed in the unifacation of Christ and satan

[spiritual_emergency]

alexandra, the link I shared that excerpt from does offer the following. I'm not sure if that specifically addresses your question or not, but perhaps there's more there for you to follow up on.
</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>

There is good reason for cults to be associated primarily with religious-spiritual organizations. Religions are based on the belief in a transcendent; supreme power usually characterized along parental lines: God is all-powerful and all-knowing, meting out rewards and punishments according to how well a person has carried out the commandments He has issued. The doctrines vary, but even in nonmonotheistic Eastern traditions; Heaven and Hell in some form are designated as the consequences of good and bad behavior.

Although mystics are unanimous in defining God as incomprehensible and not of this world, human dependency needs require something more approachable and personal: Even in Buddhism, therefore, whose founder declared that concepts of gods and heaven were an illusion, many followers bow to a Buddha idol to invoke Buddha's protection and blessing. But even more satisfying to the wish for a superparent is an actual human with divine, enlightened, or messianic status. The powerful wish to be guided and protected by a superior being can propel a seeker into the arms of a leader who is given that status by his or her followers. Such a surrender to the fantasy of the perfect parent may be accompanied by a feeling of great joy at "coming home."

Source: Treating Former Members of Cults - Arthur J. Deikman


</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

The underlying premise to your question seems to be who determines what is valid reality and what is not? I would suggest to a large extent that it is group consensus. It's for this reason that I find what Deikman has to say about cult behavior in "normal" groups to be particularly fascinating.

.