Was I in a cult?

[Nihilist Virus]

Hi, I hope I'm posting this in the right place. I have a question.

As you can see I'm an atheist. That tag doesn't really do much service to what I am, though. I'm more of a nihilist, as you might guess, but more importantly I'm a former Christian.

After talking to some of you folks here and seeing the vast amount of shapes that Christianity can take and seeing so little of what I knew of as Christianity, I want to know if I was in a non-Christian Christ-based cult or if I was in a legitimate branch of Christianity (why are there even branches at all?).

I was a nondenominational Christian who believed in the imminent, literal, physical apocalypse in which Jesus would return. I believed that the antichrist would rise (possibly from the Roman Catholic Church?) and compel everyone to receive a computer chip in the right hand or forehead for the purpose of being able to participate in buying or selling. My stance on pre-trib/mid-trib/post-trib was noncommittal because I didn't think there was enough information. It didn't occur to me that there was such a thing as a non-trib Christian.

I was unsure of how it was supposed to work on a grand scale because if there are really over a billion Christians who surely all interpreted the book of Revelation in the same way as me, how would the antichrist pass this proposition? How could you pass something in the Western World if the majority of those people will refuse it outright?

I didn't think about it too much because I had the crutch of faith to lean on. But in high school when I was in a backslidden state (I would come back to Christianity from there) I was assigned a project in my economy class. I suppose the point of this project was to show us all how efficient our current monetary system is because we were tasked with completely reinventing money and we couldn't use a system anywhere near the current model of paper and coins. Each student would present his/her idea to the class, provide a visual aid, and the class would vote on the best idea. So I proposed the antichrist's mark, simply renaming it and presenting it as a subdermal computer chip, saying how great it would be to never have to worry about money, credit cards or even your driver's license since it will all be with you at all times. The teacher chuckled and asked if I got this from the Bible, but I didn't notice anyone in the class that seemed to recognize what I was doing at all. They all loved the idea and, if I recall correctly, I won overwhelmingly.

At the time I took this to be an indication that the mark could indeed be implemented on a grand scale, but now after reading these forums I'm starting to wonder if the majority of the class was simply Christians who had never heard of this interpretation of Revelation. Was I in a cult?

 

[Albion]

Can't say...not without more information.

This particular theory about an implanted computer chip would most often be considered eccentric, but it's hardly significant enough in itself to make the church body be a "cult."

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Can't say...not without more information.

This particular theory about an implanted computer chip would most often be considered eccentric, but it's hardly significant enough in itself to make the church body be a "cult."

What other information do you need?

 

[John Davidson]

I would say no, it wasn't a cult.

End times beliefs aren't usually weighed too heavily when determining if a church body is a cult.

And your particular belief concerning the computer chip implant is not really unorthodox. Many Christians hold to that theory.

 

[graceandpeace]

After talking to some of you folks here and seeing the vast amount of shapes that Christianity can take and seeing so little of what I knew of as Christianity, I want to know if I was in a non-Christian Christ-based cult or if I was in a legitimate branch of Christianity (why are there even branches at all?).

The short answer is, particular events in history & different religious interpretations.

I was a nondenominational Christian who believed in the imminent, literal, physical apocalypse in which Jesus would return. I believed that the antichrist would rise (possibly from the Roman Catholic Church?) and compel everyone to receive a computer chip in the right hand or forehead for the purpose of being able to participate in buying or selling. My stance on pre-trib/mid-trib/post-trib was noncommittal because I didn't think there was enough information. It didn't occur to me that there was such a thing as a non-trib Christian.

I can't say for sure whether your church was a cult based on this info. What I can say is that this sort of obsession with "end times" elements & resulting paranoia is not typical of most mainstream churches.

Most churches that identify as "non-denominational" typically resemble Baptist, charismatic/Pentecostal, or fundamentalism in beliefs & practice. Some such churches also hold to Dispensationalism, perhaps your church did as well.

I was unsure of how it was supposed to work on a grand scale because if there are really over a billion Christians who surely all interpreted the book of Revelation in the same way as me, how would the antichrist pass this proposition? How could you pass something in the Western World if the majority of those people will refuse it outright?

True, & this particular interpretation is not common in mainstream churches.

I didn't think about it too much because I had the crutch of faith to lean on. But in high school when I was in a backslidden state (I would come back to Christianity from there) I was assigned a project in my economy class. I suppose the point of this project was to show us all how efficient our current monetary system is because we were tasked with completely reinventing money and we couldn't use a system anywhere near the current model of paper and coins. Each student would present his/her idea to the class, provide a visual aid, and the class would vote on the best idea. So I proposed the antichrist's mark, simply renaming it and presenting it as a subdermal computer chip, saying how great it would be to never have to worry about money, credit cards or even your driver's license since it will all be with you at all times. The teacher chuckled and asked if I got this from the Bible, but I didn't notice anyone in the class that seemed to recognize what I was doing at all. They all loved the idea and, if I recall correctly, I won overwhelmingly.

At the time I took this to be an indication that the mark could indeed be implemented on a grand scale, but now after reading these forums I'm starting to wonder if the majority of the class was simply Christians who had never heard of this interpretation of Revelation. Was I in a cult?

Again, can't say for sure if you were in a cult, but most of the world's Christians do not interpret Revelation in that manner. I would call it a fringe interpretation at the least.

 

[Paidiske]

Here is a list of common characteristics of cults (understood as religious groups which are extremist and damaging, usually outside what is considered orthodox by the religion they claim to be part of):

- The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
– Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
– Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
– The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
– The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
– The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
– The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
– The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members’ participating in behaviours or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
– The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
– Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
– The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
– The group is preoccupied with making money.
– Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
– Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
– The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.

List taken from here: http://www.icsahome.com/articles/characteristics

 

[com7fy8]

I was a nondenominational Christian who believed in the imminent, literal, physical apocalypse in which Jesus would return.

Jesus says what will happen "Immediately after the tribulation of those days" > see Matthew 24:29-31.

I believed that the antichrist would rise (possibly from the Roman Catholic Church?) and compel everyone to receive a computer chip in the right hand or forehead for the purpose of being able to participate in buying or selling.

I think the Roman Catholic Church is too weak to get control of the whole world. There have been times in history when the Catholic group could piggy-back on political and military powers. But then people might go along with threats, but only in order to stay alive. I think the real anti-Christ will not accept obedience which comes only as an act. And so I understand the real anti-Christ will gain the full desire of followers. And the mark could be physical, but not what one accepts except if the person fully desires the anti-Christ.

I understand that the one of evil will be lawless. Roman Catholicism has plenty of laws. I think the truly Satanic being of the end time will not accept any form of human law or social mores or ways of control. The real one will consider oneself too superior to need to depend on what humans have used and seen, so far. There will be no outward set forms of regulation, but absolute control from spiritual means. Even threats are a form of law.

if there are really over a billion Christians who surely all interpreted the book of Revelation in the same way as me, how would the antichrist pass this proposition?

My comment above might relate to this

I proposed the antichrist's mark, simply renaming it and presenting it as a subdermal computer chip, saying how great it would be to never have to worry about money, credit cards or even your driver's license since it will all be with you at all times.

A computer chip would be too inferior a way of control, for the anti-Christ, I consider, and have explained why . . . abo^e

I think a computer chip could help to eliminate robberies and burglaries. Plus, you could have satellite connection with chips so needy people could be located, and parolees could be tracked and have proof of where they have been so no one can make things up against them.

Was I in a cult?

It could have been cult-ic . . . by >

(1) isolating you with ones of your group's feather, instead of you learning how to relate in love with various people > "if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46);

(2) keeping you overly involved with ideas and teachings, instead of getting more and more into learning how to love > 1 Corinthians 8:1-2;

(3) keeping you busy with what you think and do, away from getting more and more personal with God and pleasing Him > 1 Corinthians 6:17, 1 Peter 3:4, Colossians 3:15, Matthew 11:28-30.

 

[Sketcher]

That's a relatively recent interpretation of the mark of the beast. It could be way off. There were some in the days of the Roman Empire who believed it referred to the coins bearing the image and praise of Caesar. I don't put too much stock in an eschatology which is that specific. Maybe it's RFID. Maybe it's something else. The bolder people get with the specifics of the interpretation, the shakier I feel they are.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Hi, I hope I'm posting this in the right place. I have a question.

As you can see I'm an atheist. That tag doesn't really do much service to what I am, though. I'm more of a nihilist, as you might guess, but more importantly I'm a former Christian.

After talking to some of you folks here and seeing the vast amount of shapes that Christianity can take and seeing so little of what I knew of as Christianity, I want to know if I was in a non-Christian Christ-based cult or if I was in a legitimate branch of Christianity (why are there even branches at all?).

I was a nondenominational Christian who believed in the imminent, literal, physical apocalypse in which Jesus would return. I believed that the antichrist would rise (possibly from the Roman Catholic Church?) and compel everyone to receive a computer chip in the right hand or forehead for the purpose of being able to participate in buying or selling. My stance on pre-trib/mid-trib/post-trib was noncommittal because I didn't think there was enough information. It didn't occur to me that there was such a thing as a non-trib Christian.

I was unsure of how it was supposed to work on a grand scale because if there are really over a billion Christians who surely all interpreted the book of Revelation in the same way as me, how would the antichrist pass this proposition? How could you pass something in the Western World if the majority of those people will refuse it outright?

I didn't think about it too much because I had the crutch of faith to lean on. But in high school when I was in a backslidden state (I would come back to Christianity from there) I was assigned a project in my economy class. I suppose the point of this project was to show us all how efficient our current monetary system is because we were tasked with completely reinventing money and we couldn't use a system anywhere near the current model of paper and coins. Each student would present his/her idea to the class, provide a visual aid, and the class would vote on the best idea. So I proposed the antichrist's mark, simply renaming it and presenting it as a subdermal computer chip, saying how great it would be to never have to worry about money, credit cards or even your driver's license since it will all be with you at all times. The teacher chuckled and asked if I got this from the Bible, but I didn't notice anyone in the class that seemed to recognize what I was doing at all. They all loved the idea and, if I recall correctly, I won overwhelmingly.

At the time I took this to be an indication that the mark could indeed be implemented on a grand scale, but now after reading these forums I'm starting to wonder if the majority of the class was simply Christians who had never heard of this interpretation of Revelation. Was I in a cult?

Based on this information alone? Impossible to say. The ideas presented are representative of a great deal of contemporary American-style Evangelicalism or Fundamentalism. Elements of what I usually consider American pop-religion or pop-Christianity--it's the sort of Christianity that dominates "Christian" media--television, popular books, movies, music, etc.

It's not representative of the Christian mainstream however. Mainstream Christian eschatology tends to speak in broader terms not in specific details--there is no "end times map". In fact, you probably aren't likely to hear about "end times" generally in a lot of mainstream churches, because that's not the focus. Eschatology, like the rest of Christian theology, is about Christ; so the focus is on Christ. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, God became man; and in uniting Himself with our humanity--even in death--has rescued it, glorified it, sanctified it and in the resurrection we have the promise that we likewise will be raised up from the dead, to share in the renewal and restoration of all creation, of all things. That as the Creed says, "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end. We believe ... in the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come." It is not about tribulations or famines or wars or antichrists (history has seen all these things time and again, so those are nothing to be excited or impressed about), it's about the redemption of all creation through Jesus, and the renewal of all creation to share in the future glory, peace, justice, and goodness which God has brought about, is bringing about, and will bring about on the last day. Eschatology shouldn't be about apocalypticism, but about the scope of redemption in Christ for the world, of God's great love for the world, and ultimately the total transformation of the world in love, hope, and justice.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Catherineanne]

I was a nondenominational Christian who believed in the imminent, literal, physical apocalypse in which Jesus would return. I believed that the antichrist would rise (possibly from the Roman Catholic Church?) and compel everyone to receive a computer chip in the right hand or forehead for the purpose of being able to participate in buying or selling. My stance on pre-trib/mid-trib/post-trib was noncommittal because I didn't think there was enough information. It didn't occur to me that there was such a thing as a non-trib Christian. .....

At the time I took this to be an indication that the mark could indeed be implemented on a grand scale, but now after reading these forums I'm starting to wonder if the majority of the class was simply Christians who had never heard of this interpretation of Revelation. Was I in a cult?

Why assume a chip? Why not a tattoo, or an ink stamp? The Bible says absolutely nothing about computers. Not a thing.

As for the suggestion, I am pretty sure there will never be a chip implant for humans because we live too long; the technology would be overtaken within a year or two, and within 5 it would be totally useless. It is far easier to put the chip on a credit card, and the card in our wallets. I am not sure why God would be bothered about this; the Lord said very clearly that we are to render unto Caesar that which is his.

As for Revelation, it was not written about the 21st century western world. If it had been, there would have been no need for a code. The fact that it is written in code means it was about people who were powerful and around at the time; the Romans.

Churches may sometimes behave in cultish ways, without actually being cults, and this will form a pattern. There is not enough information about your church to determine whether there was anything cultish about it. Barking mad beliefs do not necessarily count on their own.

 

[Albion]

What other information do you need?

Assuming that you aren't using the word (cult) to refer to some outfit that engaged in mind control, sleep deprivation, drugs, and the whole purple kool-ade kind of thing...

Religious cults are defined by peculiar, unusual, doctrines. You gave us only one such to judge by. As I said, I wouldn't call this group a cult on the basis of that one alone. So.....are there other strange beliefs that were taught or required of the followers?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Assuming that you aren't using the word (cult) to refer to some outfit that engaged in mind control, sleep deprivation, drugs, and the whole purple kool-ade kind of thing...

Right, they weren't doing anything more harmful than other Christian churches. And they certainly didn't deny the divinity of Christ.

Religious cults are defined by peculiar, unusual, doctrines. You gave us only one such to judge by. As I said, I wouldn't call this group a cult on the basis of that one alone. So.....are there other strange beliefs that were taught or required of the followers?

I'll have to think back to my life back then. I didn't stop and identify all of the weird beliefs because, obviously, they seemed normal at the time. Especially when everyone was reinforcing it.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Right, they weren't doing anything more harmful than other Christian churches.

Are claiming Christian Churches are doing harm? To whom/or what are they doing harm? What evidence of this do you have or are to taking a few instances and using a broad brush to paint all Christian Churches? I will assume you will come back with the RCC corruption....

 

[Albion]

And they certainly didn't deny the divinity of Christ.

OK.

I'll have to think back to my life back then. I didn't stop and identify all of the weird beliefs because, obviously, they seemed normal at the time. Especially when everyone was reinforcing it.

I understand, but of course I/we can't adequately answer your question about "it" possibly being a cult without knowing if there were any doctrines being taught that would cause us to put the group into that category. As it stands, the answer would seem to be "no."

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

On a related note, I heard a guy the other day who interpreted the Mark of the Beast as cellphone use. They are placed in our palms and against our heads, are increasingly used for commerce and apps, social media and the internet are increasingly consuming our time, becoming our 'god' as it were.

Anyway, many Christians have different interpretations of Revelation. If anything, your class experiment showed how it could actually come to pass, legitimising the belief as a possible interpretation. I myself don't ascribe to this view, but I have met a couple of fundamentalist christians who do believe in the coming computer chip.

 

[com7fy8]

'll have to think back to my life back then. I didn't stop and identify all of the weird beliefs because, obviously, they seemed normal at the time. Especially when everyone was reinforcing it.

Even if someone or a group does not have obviously weird beliefs, a person can have what I call fingerprint beliefs > ones which the person keeps repeating and they are more or less the main attention getter of that person's ministry, and identified with that person, therefore having his or her fingerprints on the person's message. Meanwhile the person does not talk about how to be pleasing to God, how God is personal with us in His own love (Romans 5:5) and personally guiding (Colossians 3:15) and correcting us (Hebrews 12:7-11), and how the Bible says to relate in love (including Ephesians 4:31-32 and 1 Peter 5:3), and all else in God's word > the fingerprinted ministry can have a way of staying mainly with only certain beliefs and using a lot of different scriptures to keep coming back to the same one or a few subjects. These ideas may not be obviously strange but they can have people isolated with only certain leaders. So, this may not be a cult thing, but cultic.

 

[Albion]

I agree in principle. There probably is something that could fairly be called a "cultic mindset" even if the church in question is not a cult by definition.

 

[Brianlear]

Never get caught up in specific interpretations of very general scripture. There is a theory out there that insists the Mark of the Beast will be stamped on anyone that works on Sunday, because Saturday is the real Sabbath and the Sabbath is the Mark of God. But remember that when Jesus was here, he basically said it doesn't matter what day it is, what really matters is what is in your heart. People conveniently forget that part. Personally, if there is ever a conflict between scripture and the actions of Jesus, I go with Jesus. Since his actions and words were exactly that, actions and words from HIS mouth. Revelation is so wide open to interpretation that people can make it say basically anything. But you can't argue with what Jesus said. Some will take issue with this but he hasn't led me wrong yet.

 

[ViaCrucis]

But you can't argue with what Jesus said.

Well, one could. That's precisely where debates over the nature of the Eucharist often locate themselves.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[98cwitr]

Hi, I hope I'm posting this in the right place. I have a question.

As you can see I'm an atheist. That tag doesn't really do much service to what I am, though. I'm more of a nihilist, as you might guess, but more importantly I'm a former Christian.

After talking to some of you folks here and seeing the vast amount of shapes that Christianity can take and seeing so little of what I knew of as Christianity, I want to know if I was in a non-Christian Christ-based cult or if I was in a legitimate branch of Christianity (why are there even branches at all?).

I was a nondenominational Christian who believed in the imminent, literal, physical apocalypse in which Jesus would return. I believed that the antichrist would rise (possibly from the Roman Catholic Church?) and compel everyone to receive a computer chip in the right hand or forehead for the purpose of being able to participate in buying or selling. My stance on pre-trib/mid-trib/post-trib was noncommittal because I didn't think there was enough information. It didn't occur to me that there was such a thing as a non-trib Christian.

I was unsure of how it was supposed to work on a grand scale because if there are really over a billion Christians who surely all interpreted the book of Revelation in the same way as me, how would the antichrist pass this proposition? How could you pass something in the Western World if the majority of those people will refuse it outright?

I didn't think about it too much because I had the crutch of faith to lean on. But in high school when I was in a backslidden state (I would come back to Christianity from there) I was assigned a project in my economy class. I suppose the point of this project was to show us all how efficient our current monetary system is because we were tasked with completely reinventing money and we couldn't use a system anywhere near the current model of paper and coins. Each student would present his/her idea to the class, provide a visual aid, and the class would vote on the best idea. So I proposed the antichrist's mark, simply renaming it and presenting it as a subdermal computer chip, saying how great it would be to never have to worry about money, credit cards or even your driver's license since it will all be with you at all times. The teacher chuckled and asked if I got this from the Bible, but I didn't notice anyone in the class that seemed to recognize what I was doing at all. They all loved the idea and, if I recall correctly, I won overwhelmingly.

At the time I took this to be an indication that the mark could indeed be implemented on a grand scale, but now after reading these forums I'm starting to wonder if the majority of the class was simply Christians who had never heard of this interpretation of Revelation. Was I in a cult?

To be "in a cult" we need to know about the "church" or "organization" you belonged to, not simply what your beliefs were.