A delusion held by one is insanity.
A delusion held by a few is a cult.
A delusion held by many is a religion.If the true definition of a cult is?
Perhaps the parameters of the question were too limiting.
Truth does not always fit neatly into the boxes which we prepare for it.
Report Abuse
On second thought, my answer DID fit the parameters of the question. You asked what the true definition of a cult was, and that's the answer I provided, as I see it. Actually, that's what we all did.
You don't have to like an answer for it to be true, or at least valid.
Report Abuse
A group of people that other people wish refer to in a derogatory way is a cult only within the parameters of that perspective. None of such groups would identify themselves as a cult, therefore personal discretion is the only way to interpret this term when it is used because it is derogatory in nature and the user usually has no intent of remaining unbiased.
Since most religions are based on following the teachings of one man, such as Jesus Christ or Buddha, I personally feel like the definition of a cult has to transcend that criteria.
I choose to define a cult by the outcome of the lives of those who adhere to it. Take for example the Branch Davidians, the Peoples' Temple, the Manson Family, and the Heaven's Gate cults. Each of these groups brought misery, death and/or poverty to either their own members or to innocent victims unaffiliated with them (such as Sharon Tate).
In the case of the Branch Davidians, being a devout member of that group meant that you viewed David Koresh much like the way in which Christians view Jesus Christ. In other words, you had to place your faith and the hope of your temporal and spiritual welfare in the hands of David Koresh, follow his teachings, and obey his law. And look where it got the Branch Davidians. Most of them were burnt to death when the federal government pumped their compound full of explosive gas and then incinerated it (but that's another story). David Koresh could not save them from total extermination (at least in terms of those who chose to stay with him). Look at the Peoples' Temple. Jim Jones gradually replaced God and Christ with himself. He once threw a Bible on the ground and stomped on it, declaring that the ';sky god'; was dead and that Jim Jones was their only hope of salvation. Jim Jones' drug induced paranoia eventually led him to flee the country, taking his followers with him. He had them collecting retirement and whatever government handouts they could get, all of which he pocketed and used as he saw fit. In the midst of a South American jungle, he had a refrigerator full of fresh fruit and milk while his followers were lucky to eat one full meal of beans and rice a day. He worked them all day and most of the night long, even when they were very ill. He held ';white nights'; frequently, which deprived them of sleep. He controlled everything they did and abused them in just about every way (including THAT one, and both genders too, although mostly other men).
I included the Manson Family, though it was more of a small group of violent criminals than what we might normally call a cult, because they all followed the teachings of Charles Manson. He didn't just talk them into murdering a pregnant actress. He taught them to believe in what he called ';Helter Skelter';, which he taught was the apocalypse brought on in the form of violent race wars. In fact, the murders committed by the Manson Family were a result of Manson's urge to begin those race wars himself by making the murder of Sharon Tate appear to be a hate crime perpetrated by blacks, lest he lose the faith of his followers. Again, this system of belief brought death and destruction.
You might say that being a follower of Christ in ancient times could get you killed, or that there have been some who claimed to be followers of Christ and who caused death and destruction of others, or recklessly got their fellow adherents killed. First consider the false Christians of the dark ages who attempted to spread their version of Christianity with the sword during the inquisitions and the crusades. They can quite easily be written off as misguided, evil people who simply did not and do not represent Christ or His teachings. They did not have authority to act in His name, and His Gospel is available to anyone who wants to compare it against the behavior of those who participated in the violent mistakes of the dark ages. We can clearly see they did not follow Christ's teachings.
Next, consider the innocent followers of Christ who suffered martyrdom and persecution at the hands of the Roman Empire or the ecclesiastical/political authority of the heirarchy of ancient Judaism. Following Christ did indeed get you into a lot of hot water back then. It gets you in varying amounts of trouble today, depending on where you practice Christian beliefs, and how you behave while doing it. The true test of the truth of Christianity's authenticity exists in the salvation one gets from being true to the Gospel, even at pain of death. But on the outside, and in this mortal world, we do not see the rewards a martyr receives, and so that does not suit our purpose here. Instead, consider the good that is done in the name of Christ. While it is true that the members of the Peoples' Temple sacrificed their money, health, and everything else they had for Jim Jones, it was for his own personal benefit. When a Christian sacrifices anything for Christ, Christ is not enriched by it, at least not in the same way Jim Jones was when he pocketed all the social security money he took from his followers.
Put it this way: being in a cult benefits the cult's leader, while being in a legitimate religion benefits the individual, even if only spiritually.
This is not to say that all legitimate religions are true. But hopefully we can all agree
A ';religion'; that doesn't have enough members to use force against those that call them a ';Cult';.
Christianity, Islam, Judeism... They all started off as ';Cults'; until their numbers became so great that they could form armies to slaughter those that called them such.
Any one who is silly enough to believe in a trinity.
No comments:
Post a Comment