Religions and Cults

[juvenissun]

All religious belief systems are, by definition, "cults," it's only a question of degree and devotion as to what extent.

This one is logically confused.
Or, it needs a definition of "religious belief".

Grade: D

 

[DogmaHunter]

This is a thread directed particularly toward the non-religious but anyone is welcome to participate with how they see this issue from where they sit.

Religions and Cults, at face value, have a number of things in common. "Religion" would seem to always be the neutral or positive term whereas "cult" seems always to be the pejorative term. At least I don't know of any cult member who embraces that term for themselves.

But here's the question: What's the most significant difference(s) between a religion and a cult? From a non-religious perspective, are there any significant differences?

I'ld say "general size of the following".

A religion with only a marginal amount of followers, will be labeled "cult" or "sect" more easily I think.

But at bottom, not considering the amount of believers, I'ld agree to the idea that there isn't any real difference.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Based on your definition I don't see why an atheistic, scientific belief system should be excluded.

"an atheistic, scientific belief system" ?

What is that?
Can you give an example?

I find that confusing.

Because atheism is like, literally, the abscence of a belief in gods, while science is an evidence based method of inquiry to find out how stuff works.

 

[ChetSinger]

Cult is derived from Latin Cultus, meaning an area tilled or looked after, so was figuratively extended to looking after a god.
Historically it has been used to describe the series of acts done for gods, as in the cult of Baal for instance, meaning how you bring sacrifice correctly, the body of hymns etc. It is thus a body of usages and practices related to worship of a god/s.

Religion is from Latin Religare, meaning to bind. It refers to someone bound to orders like the Franciscans originally, before being extended to all participants in the worship of a god/s.

According to the Oxford dictionary:
Cult: a system of veneration and worship directed to a person or object.
Religion: Belief and worship of a supernatural being, usually a god.

So cults are so called because they usually revere excessively their living founder, sometimes to god-like status.
While cults may be called Religions, Religions are not cults as cultic practices are parts thereof (like veneration of saints for instance), while in an actual Cult the practice thereof and acts of veneration towards their founder is usually the dominant component to exclusion of all else.

Thanks for the clarity of a dictionary definition.

 

[Tree of Life]

"an atheistic, scientific belief system" ?

What is that?
Can you give an example?

I find that confusing.

Because atheism is like, literally, the abscence of a belief in gods, while science is an evidence based method of inquiry to find out how stuff works.

An atheistic belief system would be a system of beliefs that does not include any gods. A scientific belief system would be one that assumes the priority of the scientific method as an epistemological method. So an atheistic, scientific belief system would be one that does not include any gods and that assumes the priority of the scientific method as an epistemological method.

Perhaps your belief system fits this description? If so, that would be one example. I would also offer the belief system of Richard Dawkins as an atheistic, scientific belief system.

 

[ChetSinger]

Belief systems needn't be religious. They can be political, or philosophical, for example.

 

[Davian]

An atheistic belief system would be a system of beliefs that does not include any gods.

If you are going to describe a belief system by what it does not include, do we then need to also break out those belief systems that do not include reptilian humanoids and/or extraterrestrial aliens abducting humans? What about ghosts and other 'paranormal' stuff (ESP, etc)?

Do you have a non-reptilian-humanoid belief system?

A scientific belief system would be one that assumes the priority of the scientific method as an epistemological method.

I make no such assumption. I am willing to use whatever method that will provide the most accurate description of reality.

So an atheistic, scientific belief system would be one that does not include any gods and that assumes the priority of the scientific method as an epistemological method.

Perhaps your belief system fits this description?

No, it does not.

If so, that would be one example. I would also offer the belief system of Richard Dawkins as an atheistic, scientific belief system.

I would not presume to tell him how he thinks.

 

[Tree of Life]

If you are going to describe a belief system by what it does not include, do we then need to also break out those belief systems that do not include reptilian humanoids and/or extraterrestrial aliens abducting humans? What about ghosts and other 'paranormal' stuff (ESP, etc)?

Do you have a non-reptilian-humanoid belief system?

Since the majority of belief systems around the world and throughout history have included gods I think that it's meaningful to designate belief systems that deviate from this norm. This is not necessary for obscure beliefs like paranormal stuff.

I would not presume to tell him how he thinks.

Do you think that this description does not describe Dawkins' belief system?

 

[ViaCrucis]

The term "cult" has several meanings, in a fairly basic and neutral sense it can indicate rite, worship, or honor. For example the cult of relics in Roman Catholicism speaks of the veneration of relics, the cult of saints the veneration of the saints, etc. In the pagan context of ancient Rome we can speak of the cult of Adonis, or the cult of Dionysus, or the cult of Jupiter.

In this sense I don't think calling Christianity would at all be wrong, as the cult centered upon the person of Jesus. Here "cult" is not a negative, but a neutral idea of worship, veneration. We still use this sense often when we talk about a "cult of personality" in regard to celebrities or public figures, in and of itself it is a neutral sense.

There is also a negative sense, used in the study of the sociology of religion, a cult is a religious organization or movement that has certain marks or qualities associated with it: cults are highly controlling, members are expected to devote themselves entirely to the group and especially to the group's leader, members' lives are dominated by the group and the leadership of the group is to be accepted without question, members are regularly expected to cut ties with the outside world and sever relationships with family members and friends who are not part of the group.

Jamestown (The People's Temple) was a cult. The Branch Davidians were a cult. The FLDS is a cult. The Church of Scientology is a cult.

In certain Christian polemical circles, namely the counter-cult movement, a "cult" gains a new definition largely as a group which does not conform to the historic orthodoxy of Christianity, and is therefore essentially an alternative term for a heretical or heterodox group. I don't know that this is a particularly helpful definition though, as often it is also conflated with cults as mentioned above, and also doesn't necessarily take into consideration cults which may adhere to a more orthodox theology.

The orthodoxy-heterodoxy dynamic isn't, in my opinion, a helpful way of defining a cult; further there is the risk of defining a cult entirely subjectively on the basis of "that group is different than my group". By restricting the idea of a cult to the sociological definition(s) I think we have something a bit more objective to work with; when Christians deal with the orthodoxy-heterodoxy dynamic it would be preferable to use those terms: heretical, heterodox, etc since the issue is a deviation or disagreement with an established theological orthodoxy.

Cults are [usually] religious groups which exercise control on an authoritarian level, and keep members in line through threats, emotional and psychological manipulation, separating members from the outside world so as to make them more dependent upon the group and more easily manipulated by the group's leadership. Whereas religion(s) tend to not exercise that level of control. If someone decided they didn't want to be a Lutheran, a Presbyterian, a Methodist, or a Catholic anymore their friends and family may be saddened by the choice, but the choice will most likely be respected and things will remain amicable--Lutherans or Methodists aren't going to send goons to a deconvert's house and threaten them or make life a living hell for them, and aren't going to prohibit them from spending time with family still in the churches; because mainstream churches like this don't exercise control like that, and aren't interested in manipulating people into staying lock-step, and typically leadership in these churches aren't "powerful" but act as public servants for the good of the congregation, and typically are subject to the congregation itself on some level.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Davian]

Since the majority of belief systems around the world and throughout history have included gods I think that it's meaningful to designate belief systems that deviate from this norm.

I disagree. Perhaps I live in a time and place where religion is thin on the ground. I have never been a believer, and never really contemplated the concept of 'atheism' until I was almost 40. I still do not self-identify with the term.

This is not necessary for obscure beliefs like paranormal stuff.

Personal-god-type religions are more obscure to me than the paranormal. And how about them crop circles?

Do you think that this description does not describe Dawkins' belief system?

Not from what I gather from what I know of him, and by how I see the word 'belief' used by religionists.

He may have unscientific beliefs that I am not aware of, but I gather that when he says that he 'believes' that chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor, he is saying that 'he tentatively accepts the testable, falsifiable hypothesis based on the currently available evidence, subject to change if new information becomes available". I could say the same for semiconductor theory, stellar nucleosynthesis, or inflation theory.

Does that describe your position on your theology?

 

[DogmaHunter]

An atheistic belief system would be a system of beliefs that does not include any gods.

Wouldn't it be more informative and valueable to identify belief systems by which IS believed, instead of what is NOT believed?

Since there's an infinite amount of things that any individual does NOT believe.....

A scientific belief system would be one that assumes the priority of the scientific method as an epistemological method. So an atheistic, scientific belief system would be one that does not include any gods and that assumes the priority of the scientific method as an epistemological method.

You don't think that science is a good method to find out how stuff works?

In any case, I don't subscribe to the absoluteness of science.
I sure do recognise that at present, it's the best we have to find out how stuff works.

But I'm willing to listen to anyone who claims to have a better method and evaluate his/her evidence in support of it.