Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Is trinity a cult?
But a basic is denying that Jesus is God, and not going by the Bible. So, this could include a lot of publicly accepted religious groups and philosophies, like Judaism and Islam and "New Age".
com7fy8 said:One basic thing I have been told is that a cult is a group of people who deny that Jesus is "God". And they claim the Bible but do not go by what it says. And they control their members. They might make some person or thing the "enemy" and keep a lot of attention on that enemy and make a project of criticizing that enemy, and this keeps attention away from how their own leader or leadership is wrong.
Of course, by the way, any of us can do this, our own selves > I mean, how we can be so busy pointing the finger at someone else so we and others don't notice how we ourselves are wrong.
Also, I see how a cult can have very different things and standards and requirements so they can say, only we have this and this is essential and so you need to join us.
But a Christian denomination can do this, too > having more or less unique practices and beliefs and saying they are so important and no one or not everyone else has them and so you need to join that denomination. So a denomination can be cultic.
You might start with my friend's book:
Jesus on Trial, David Limbaugh
You've been told wrong. That's the modern false definition of cult. Judaism is not a cult but they deny Jesus is God. Islam is not a cult. They deny Jesus is God. etc. etc.
Luke 11:52
Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge; you did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering.
Those darn lawyers!
You might start with my friend's book:
Jesus on Trial, David Limbaugh
It would at least settle his demand with as much definitiveness as he has settled mine.Hand him a book, TasteforTruth and be done with it.
And that of course, settles nothing.
David practices law in Missouri and the Mormons tell us that is where the garden of Eden is. But I assure you he walks upright, no belly slithering.
You are right. The thing is, I am not serious in my demand. I am Christian. I respond as I do to expose the double-standard being leveraged by the Chaplain.To drstevej and taste for Truth:
Gentlemen,
Please allow me to butt in on your conversation.
I was a committed Christian for almost sixty years, until the time I could no longer accept certain doctrines that I had championed for all of this time.
Your current prove this no ..prove that conversation serves no useful purpose, since neither of you are going to give way (or to see any good reason why you should). I beg you not to go on wasting each others time. Please agree to differ; and leave it to the Beloved.
Thank you.
Paul
Dang... I had catfish for breakfast. I'm doomed. :oActually, I think it only calls Christian creeds an abomination.
But since your Bible calls catfish an abomination, I wouldn't worry about it too much.
What you have described is the new CWR, where nigh unto every thread will be hijacked by critics of the LDS religion and turned into a bash-Mormonism extravaganza. Get used to it. It only took 5 posts in this thread. That's impressive, but by no means a record.Why has everyone missed the point of the OP?
It seems as though the thread has simply been hijacked into a debate of doctrines.
I only joke, of course. I've read similar books to that before and still have never been convinced. There are usually some things the author wants me to assume as true from the start that I am unwilling to assume. For example, I usually have to accept the Gospels as true in order to proceed. Being able to poke holes in the story makes it rather hard to prove something.
I understand, but I do think it is worth the read.
And you might also try Testimony of the Evangelists by Simon Greenleaf. Greenleaf was the leading scholar on evidential law at Harvard and was challenged to apply legal principles of witness credibility to the gospel witness to Jesus of the Gospels. His book provides a comparative analysis of the accounts judged from a legal standard.
In the process he became a Christian.
Dang... I had catfish for breakfast. I'm doomed. :o
Yes, I would say so; but there would be the motive for redefining, that would be deeper than only the beliefs. So, I think we could discuss what motive or motives make a group a cult.It's more a matter of the kinds of beliefs than the much-discussed control over the membership or the uniqueness of any religious body's interpretations.
1. Is the nature of God redefined?
2. Is the nature of Man redefined?
3. Do they base it upon their own scriptures?
Say 'yes' to any of those and you're probably dealing with a cult, regardless of how unthreatening it is in practice.
Yes, I would say so; but there would be the motive for redefining, that would be deeper than only the beliefs. So, I think we could discuss what motive or motives make a group a cult.
When we have our own cult-like motives, this can make us available to join a wrong group of people with our wrong motives...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?