Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Radcliffe Emerson · 07-01-2003, 11:37 AM

All cults may not be religions, but most religions are cults.
At least the monotheistic ones.

Tom Sawyer · 07-01-2003, 01:27 PM

In my defintion, the difference between a religion and a cult is about 100 years.

Anyone can start a cult and lots of people do. Most of them go nowhere and there is a survival of the fittest process that weeds them out. Some of them manage to gain some staying power and take off, though.

Mormonism, for example, has some of the wierder beliefs of any of the religions out there, but it's managed to hang around since the mid-1800's, so I think it now qualifies as a religion. Other things, like Scientology and the Moonies, have a lot of followers and money and are able to compete with other faiths. Their initial success, though, isn't very relevant to my definition and if they don't last they'll never have been anything more than a cult. If they are still around in the next century, though, they'll have passed the fitness test and should be classified as religions.

I don't really see much of a difference between religions and cults - they're pretty much referring to the same thing. A religion is just a cult that's managed to gain some staying power.

Rational BAC · 07-01-2003, 02:35 PM

Tom Sawyer---

Agreed on that one.

Spaz · 07-01-2003, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational BAC
I know I'll end up kicking myself for starting this one (and may just delete it) but----------------------Atheism can be considered a cult because of NUMBERS.

You could consider it that but you'd be wrong

. A cult requires organization, there's no organization in atheism, you're not forced to do anything by anyone, no authority, no buildings, nothing. Those qualities in the OP pretty much sum up what I see as a cult, and although all cults aren't religions, all religions are cults (IMO).

Demigawd · 07-01-2003, 05:53 PM

Wasn't it Frank Zappa who opined that the different between a cult and a religion was the amount of real estate owned?

Biff the unclean · 07-01-2003, 06:42 PM

The difference is that other people belong to cults

Demigawd · 07-01-2003, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
The difference is that other people belong to cults

LOL!

Exactly! No person would consider themselves a member of a cult. That, in-and-of-itself, should be far more telling than any rhetorical chest-thumping displayed by our theistically-inclinded brethren.

Abel Stable · 07-01-2003, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational BAC
Now Christianity is the majority religion in the world today. It is a religion and no longer a cult only because of NUMBERS.
�
Atheism can be considered a cult because of NUMBERS

I guess you're implying that since there are much fewer atheists than christians, then atheism = cult. But, as Spaz pointed out, you'd be incorrect.

Either way, I'd like to know the magic number of followers that turns a cult into a religion (and what that distinction means). Has Scientology reached the threshold yet? The "Cult Danger Evaluation Frame" doesn't even mention number of followers- I think this is because it is irrelevant. The numbers only show how successful the group is at recruiting and retaining members, but thats all.

paul30 · 07-02-2003, 05:22 AM

I think the Bush administration gets 17 out of 16!

emotional · 07-02-2003, 06:27 AM

So a personal religion is a one-man-cult?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-01-2003, 11:37 AM	#11
Radcliffe Emerson Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: the dark side of Mars Posts: 1,309	All cults may not be religions, but most religions are cults. At least the monotheistic ones.

07-01-2003, 01:27 PM	#12
Tom Sawyer Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto, eh Posts: 42,293	In my defintion, the difference between a religion and a cult is about 100 years. Anyone can start a cult and lots of people do. Most of them go nowhere and there is a survival of the fittest process that weeds them out. Some of them manage to gain some staying power and take off, though. Mormonism, for example, has some of the wierder beliefs of any of the religions out there, but it's managed to hang around since the mid-1800's, so I think it now qualifies as a religion. Other things, like Scientology and the Moonies, have a lot of followers and money and are able to compete with other faiths. Their initial success, though, isn't very relevant to my definition and if they don't last they'll never have been anything more than a cult. If they are still around in the next century, though, they'll have passed the fitness test and should be classified as religions. I don't really see much of a difference between religions and cults - they're pretty much referring to the same thing. A religion is just a cult that's managed to gain some staying power.

07-01-2003, 02:35 PM	#13
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	Tom Sawyer--- Agreed on that one.

07-01-2003, 05:53 PM	#15
Demigawd Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: On a sailing ship to nowhere, leaving any place Posts: 2,254	Wasn't it Frank Zappa who opined that the different between a cult and a religion was the amount of real estate owned?

07-01-2003, 06:42 PM	#16
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	The difference is that other people belong to cults

07-02-2003, 05:22 AM	#19
paul30 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA USA Posts: 870	I think the Bush administration gets 17 out of 16!

07-02-2003, 06:27 AM	#20
emotional Banned Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Boxing ring of HaShem, Jesus and Allah Posts: 1,945	So a personal religion is a one-man-cult?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.