BenefitOfTheDoubt

When someone throws the word cult out as a magic all-condemning word they lose all credibility and prove that they are unable to reason on an intelligent level. Needless to say, I stopped reading right there.

Cult is just the English version of the Latin cultus meaning divine service, so what's your point? The only reason the word cult ever took on a derogatory meaning is because athesists hate the divine and hence hate divine service.

Julian

Your posts are displaying a profound ignorance. Please study before you post. Atheist do not believe in anything divine and therefore cannot hate it. Get it?

Julian

Toto

Ben - I think this forum may not be for you.

If you read the OP, you will notice that it uses the word cult in a very specific sense, not as a magic condemning word.

Don't you think that Jim Jones and David Koresh had something to do with the word cult taking on a derogatory meaning? Neither one of them was an atheist as far as we know.

But let me list one big difference between early Christianity and your typical modern cult: most cult leaders have a lot of sex with their followers. Either their god tells them that polygamy is the Biblically correct way of marriage, or their followers are taken in by the leader's charisma. We have no particular evidence of this for Christianity.

BenefitOfTheDoubt

Yeah right.

How could they influence the meaning of the word? Did they go around saying "I'm a cult leader" and thus give the word cult a bad name? Or did a bunch of ninnies who have no logic and are unable to meet even an insane lunatic belief like that of David Koresh with evidence (people so dumb they couldn't provide anything to disprove a complete moron like Koresh) just threw the word cult (a word they didn't even know the meaning of) out as an all condemning magic word in hopes that everyone who heard that this or that is a cult will completely ignore those beliefs and not even logically investigate them. The word cult is thrown out to prejudice people against looking into a matter. "Oh, don't bother even looking at what they believe--they're a cult." Why can't a rational inquiry be made into their belief and then if they are stupid they can be disproven with intelligent arguments? "No, that's not necessary becaue they're a CULT--a CULT" -- IT is used as a magic all-condemning word, and you know it.

That's true.

Toto

I lost a long reply yesterday when the boards came down, which I cannot reconstruct. I will just refer you to an expert I respect on the question of cults, Steve Hassan, whose website is FreedomOfMind.com. He differentiates between what he calls destructive cults and other organizations - see his FAQ.

Why can't a rational inquiry be made into their beliefs? Of course it can, but people are attracted to the cult for non-rational considerations, and then find rationalizations for staying. Parents are right to worry that their children might find something attractive about a cult and be lost. Everyone needs to learn something about mind control to protect themselves.

Of course, most of the people on this board think that all religions are cults, that religions are just cults that own a lot of real estate, etc. Calling something a cult here is probably less of an insult than it would be in the rest of the world.

ApostateAbe

My apologies. My English vocabulary does not supply any other word to describe a small group of people devoted to the service of one central authority.

Steven Avery

You might want to reread Acts again. Peter specifically said the house and money was theres to keep. However they had lied and said that they had given all, when they had not. The sin was very specific, lying to the Holy Spirit.

Chris Weimer

And Peter was the Holy Spirit?

ApostateAbe

OK, let's revisit Acts.

Acts 4

32 And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them.

33 And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all.

34 For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales

35 and lay them at the apostles' feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need.

It says in that passage that EVERYONE in the church gave EVERYTHING they had. They all lived like a communist tribe.

36 Now Joseph, a Levite of Cyprian birth, who was also called Barnabas by the apostles (which translated means Son of Encouragement),

37 and who owned a tract of land, sold it and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

Acts 5

1 But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property,

2 and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife's full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles' feet.

This is all we are told about the sinful actions of Ananias and Sapphira (EDIT: a further sin of Sapphira is mentioned later after Ananias was struck dead). According to this account, they didn't lie. Apparently, they didn't say a thing. Their real crime was secretly giving only part of their wealth in a community that usually gives everything, and not informing anyone that they were keeping anything back.

3 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land?

4 "While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."

5 And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it.

6 The young men got up and covered him up, and after carrying him out, they buried him.

The message I carry away is this one: If you don't give everything to the church, then you must announce it, or it will be considered a lie and you will die.

And what would the community think of someone who gives only a part of his wealth? See cult characteristic #9.

Why would Ananias hope to mislead God? Obviously, he was only hoping to mislead the apostles. This illustrates cult characteristic #1. Sins against the cult leader are considered sins against God himself, and they are punished accordingly.

Steven Avery

The presence of God was in the midst of the apostles.

Here are the rest of the verses. Note the part where Sapphira she had agreed with her husband to lie about the amount received.

The section is one unit, and as usual, if you leave out the relevant section of the Bible, you can come to wrong conclusions.

Acts 5:
And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.
And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much.
Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.
Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.
And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.