What is the line between a legitimate religion and crackpots?, Also what makes one gr

[OrangeEmpire]

What is the line between a legitimate religion and crackpots?, Also what makes one group a cult and the other a legit belief system?

In all honesty, probobly the size and longevity of the groups in question.

All religious views today considered mainstream were looked on as "crackpots" early in their histories when they had few followers and little established history.

As for doctrine, I find it hard to imagine. I mean, how much stranger could the actual contents of the beliefs get than, say, by-the-book Mormonism or Catholicism. Yet these are more considered "main stream" because they have lots of followers and establishment.

Cults are also distinguished by having a lot of influence or power over members of the group, and sometimes by a cult of personality surrounding a central leader.

In today's society, the inundation of secularistic thought, it seems to me rather impossible to say any are not crackpot but rather if one is a crackpot then the same is true for all of them. I am specifically and exclusively at this time referring to denominational religions, such as Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etcetera. All of them make some rather fantastic claims, claims which, judged by the secularistic approach, impossible, fiction, myth, and fairytales. It seems rather impossible then to me to say Christianity is not crackpot but Buddhism is crackpot, when the basis for the claim is the rather sensational and fantastic claims made by Buddhists.

This is not the same as mainstream but rather, to be specific and accurate, what has transpire is crackpot has become mainstream but being mainstream cannot in and of itself preclude the religion from being a crackpot.

I always found it ironic when Christians mock followers of Islam who believe martyrs go to heaven and receive virgins. As if this is more crazy a proposition than a human being surviving in the belly of a whale for 3 days, going to heaven, receiving a crown and mansion from God, and walking on streets of gold, Peter walking on water, cursing trees and them dying.

Thoughts?

 

[SavageOrangeJug]

Protesting at funerals, flying airplanes into buildings, and preaching hatred from the pulpit (G**D*** America) equals crackpots.

Worshipping your Lord at the church, synagogue, temple, or mosque of your choice equals legitimate religion.

 

[droski]

it's a fine line certainly, but i'd agree with savage generally. If you aren't hurting other peopel i don't really care what you think. of course i worry about those people teaching their kids that the bible should be read literally.

 

[therealUT]

I think the more a movement moves towards restricting its members to questioning and searching for answers on their own and outside of prescribed religious texts, the more said movement turns into a cult.

 

[BigPapaVol]

I think the more a movement moves towards restricting its members to questioning and searching for answers on their own and outside of prescribed religious texts, the more said movement turns into a cult.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

 

[therealUT]

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

I apologize for the lack of clarity.

If, as a church, you tell your members that they do not need to look any further than the Bible for absolute truth and wisdom, and your forbid them to search elsewhere for that truth and wisdom, then that "church" is a cult, IMO.

If, as a church, you tell your members that the Bible is truth, however, there are plenty of other sources of truth in the world (from Greek philosophy, to Buddhist philosophy, etc.) and encourage your members to seek out those texts, also, because you understand that ultimately that knowledge will actually lead to a firmer Christian faith and empower them to defend their faith to those outside the faith, then that "church" is a religion, IMO.

The degree of allowance to exercise free will, IMO, distinguishes a religion from a cult.

 

[SavageOrangeJug]

I apologize for the lack of clarity.

If, as a church, you tell your members that they do not need to look any further than the Bible for absolute truth and wisdom, and your forbid them to search elsewhere for that truth and wisdom, then that "church" is a cult, IMO.

If, as a church, you tell your members that the Bible is truth, however, there are plenty of other sources of truth in the world (from Greek philosophy, to Buddhist philosophy, etc.) and encourage your members to seek out those texts, also, because you understand that ultimately that knowledge will actually lead to a firmer Christian faith and empower them to defend their faith to those outside the faith, then that "church" is a religion, IMO.

The degree of allowance to exercise free will, IMO, distinguishes a religion from a cult.

I have to disagree with you here.

Most religions have scriptures they follow as "the truth".

Christianity has the Bible. Islam has the Koran.
Judaism the Torah.

If your statement is taken literally. Then every, Baptist, Church of Christ, or Church of God is a cult. Along with the Catholic, Methodist, and Episcopal churches.

 

[BigPapaVol]

I apologize for the lack of clarity.

If, as a church, you tell your members that they do not need to look any further than the Bible for absolute truth and wisdom, and your forbid them to search elsewhere for that truth and wisdom, then that "church" is a cult, IMO.

If, as a church, you tell your members that the Bible is truth, however, there are plenty of other sources of truth in the world (from Greek philosophy, to Buddhist philosophy, etc.) and encourage your members to seek out those texts, also, because you understand that ultimately that knowledge will actually lead to a firmer Christian faith and empower them to defend their faith to those outside the faith, then that "church" is a religion, IMO.

The degree of allowance to exercise free will, IMO, distinguishes a religion from a cult.

got it.

Don't have an opinion. I just think cult's a dirty word churches like to sling around at others to disparage.

 

[therealUT]

I have to disagree with you here.

Most religions have scriptures they follow as "the truth".

Christianity has the Bible. Islam has the Koran.
Judaism the Torah.

If your statement is taken literally. Then every, Baptist, Church of Christ, or Church of God is a cult. Along with the Catholic, Methodist, and Episcopal churches.

If my statement is taken literally, then the Catholic Church, along with Judaism, can, in no way, be considered cults by my standards.

The Hebrews encouraged many of their followers to learn Greek and study Greek philosophy. The Catholic Church continued this, and still does today.

The greatest Catholic theologians are well versed in Greek and Roman philosophies, as well as, in more recent times, Darwinism.

 

[SavageOrangeJug]

If my statement is taken literally, then the Catholic Church, along with Judaism, can, in no way, be considered cults by my standards.

The Hebrews encouraged many of their followers to learn Greek and study Greek philosophy. The Catholic Church continued this, and still does today.

The greatest Catholic theologians are well versed in Greek and Roman philosophies, as well as, in more recent times, Darwinism.

Perhaps I wasn't clear on your meaning.

I know in every Baptist, Church of Christ, or Church of God I have ever been in. The Bible was considered the literal word of God. I don't consider these churches cults.

 

[T-TownVol]

It all boils down to faith, in what ever you believe in, to be true....and one should read and study all faiths to strengthen one's own (religion is of man, not God, any one's God)

 

[therealUT]

Perhaps I wasn't clear on your meaning.

I know in every Baptist, Church of Christ, or Church of God I have ever been in. The Bible was considered the literal word of God. I don't consider these churches cults.

I am definitely not denying that the Bible is the word of God, in my belief. I am stating that when you restrict your followers from studying other religions, philosophies, etc. (even those that contradict with your own beliefs) you are taking steps towards a cult.

 

[T-TownVol]

I am definitely not denying that the Bible is the word of God, in my belief. I am stating that when you restrict your followers from studying other religions, philosophies, etc. (even those that contradict with your own beliefs) you are taking steps towards a cult.

any Pastor that does not incourage the members to read and study other faiths, should not be leading because his faith is not strong enough....my Church invites Pastors and leaders from other faiths to come in and lecture

 

[MontereyVol]

amount of time in existence

 

[TennTradition]

I am definitely not denying that the Bible is the word of God, in my belief. I am stating that when you restrict your followers from studying other religions, philosophies, etc. (even those that contradict with your own beliefs) you are taking steps towards a cult.

I think that you are making some good points, trUT. When a group makes a sincere and strong effort to restrict its members from learning about ideas outside of what that group espouses, it sets off warning bells....

 

[BigPapaVol]

I think that you are making some good points, trUT. When a group makes a sincere and strong effort to restrict its members from learning about ideas outside of what that group espouses, it sets off warning bells....

so is it cultish that the schools want to teach only evolution and refuse to even address intelligent design?

 

[lawgator1]

There are some Christian Churches, I believe the term is "charamsatic," that teach that the Catholic Church is a cult, or more precisely not legitimate, because they worship Mary and these other churches consider that idolatry.

And that was before The DaVinci Code.

 

[BigPapaVol]

There are some Christian Churches, I believe the term is "charamsatic," that teach that the Catholic Church is a cult, or more precisely not legitimate, because they worship Mary and these other churches consider that idolatry.

And that was before The DaVinci Code.

religion being what it is and the teachings, that all lean toward the fanatical, like those of Paul, will drive some folks to believe that they are the only ones correct.

While I think them foolish, I understand where they come to their conclusions about differing religions. It doesn't make them right or wrong.

 

[lawgator1]

religion being what it is and the teachings, that all lean toward the fanatical, like those of Paul, will drive some folks to believe that they are the only ones correct.

While I think them foolish, I understand where they come to their conclusions about differing religions. It doesn't make them right or wrong.

No, no, I agree with you there completely. I think the point is that the more long-standing and politically and financially stable a Christian-based religion is, the more likely it is to be tolerant of other religions or off-shoots of their own, e.g. Presbyterian v. Methodist v. Episcopalian. Or even something broader like Baptist v. Jewish.

But, within the Christian churches, there are some trying to gain a foothold in part by strongly condemning the established ones. This lady's charismatic church, for example, that is trying to justify to potential members why it stands alone from the mainstream churches touting esssentially the same version of the world.

 

[KB5252]

No, no, I agree with you there completely. I think the point is that the more long-standing and politically and financially stable a Christian-based religion is, the more likely it is to be tolerant of other religions or off-shoots of their own, e.g. Presbyterian v. Methodist v. Episcopalian. Or even something broader like Baptist v. Jewish.

But, within the Christian churches, there are some trying to gain a foothold in part by strongly condemning the established ones. This lady's charismatic church, for example, that is trying to justify to potential members why it stands alone from the mainstream churches touting esssentially the same version of the world.

Do I detect a forked tongue here. You Devil!

 

[JZVOL]

religion being what it is and the teachings, that all lean toward the fanatical, like those of Paul, will drive some folks to believe that they are the only ones correct.

While I think them foolish, I understand where they come to their conclusions about differing religions. It doesn't make them right or wrong.

I 100% believe the only way to Heaven is through Jesus, but I am far from fanatical.

 

[TennTradition]

so is it cultish that the schools want to teach only evolution and refuse to even address intelligent design?

You have to choose the time you are given to focus on what strategy you think is best. I'm not asking churches to spend one Sunday a month to explore the world's religions. I'm just saying that when that church demonizes its members for learning more about other religions, that sets of warning signs.

If the schools were to ask the government to take a child from a home where they are being introduced to creationism so that they can prevent them from learning more about it, then that too would worry me.

Try this one on for size, the folks who demonize individuals who encourage learning more about what might be the cause of climate change and insist that it can only be man is pretty cultish. Learning more is rarely a bad thing...

 

[TennTradition]

religion being what it is and the teachings, that all lean toward the fanatical, like those of Paul, will drive some folks to believe that they are the only ones correct.

While I think them foolish, I understand where they come to their conclusions about differing religions. It doesn't make them right or wrong.

Espousing an idea and claiming that it is correct is universal across almost all organizations I know of...everyone has a belief or strategy...but learning more about others' beliefs and strategies is usually encouraged within any successful organization, wouldn't you agree?

 

[BigPapaVol]

You have to choose the time you are given to focus on what strategy you think is best. I'm not asking churches to spend one Sunday a month to explore the world's religions. I'm just saying that when that church demonizes its members for learning more about other religions, that sets of warning signs.

If the schools were to ask the government to take a child from a home where they are being introduced to creationism so that they can prevent them from learning more about it, then that too would worry me.

Try this one on for size, the folks who demonize individuals who encourage learning more about what might be the cause of climate change and insist that it can only be man is pretty cultish. Learning more is rarely a bad thing...

wasn't really looking for an answer, just thought that the gov't mandated policy for our educators was a bit cultish.

The idiots blaming man for GW are absolutely a cult.

 

[TennTradition]

The idiots blaming man for GW are absolutely a cult.

I don't think I said that...did I? :blink: