Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 17:06:07 GMT -5
Today, in a blog conversation between a current 2x2 member and Mike Garde, Managing Director of Dialogue Ireland and an acknowledged cult expert, Mr.Garde declared "I repeat I do not regard the 2×2′s as a cultist group under any defintion.(sic)" Furthermore, in a blow to the Irvine Grey book, Mr.Garde unequivocally rejects Mr.Grey's characterization of the 2x2's as a cult, let alone a particularly dangerous one. "He (Irvine Grey) concludes that they are a dangerous cult. I disagree. dialogueireland.wordpress.com/about/cultism/However, on coming down on the side of the Two by Twos I do not believe his definition of it being a cult of Christianity is accurate. This is the opening Mission Statement of Dialogue Ireland: Mission StatementExplanatory note: Whenever we use the words ‘cult’, ‘cultism’ or ‘cultist’ we are referring solely to the phenomenon where troubling levels of undue psychological influence may exist. This phenomenon can occur in almost any group or organisation.Motivated by the inalienable right to religious freedom, Dialogue Ireland is an independent Trust that seeks to promote people’s freedom to make informed choices about religious, spiritual and philosophical beliefs. Though Dialogue Ireland has its origins as a Christian organisation it is now open to all belief systems and none. All we require is that those working with us share a common understanding of cultism*. dialogueireland.wordpress.com/about/
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jun 14, 2014 18:22:40 GMT -5
Who said he is a cult expert?
Note: He refers to the 2x2s under cultism rather than using the word cult which the explanatory note refers to them being the same thing. And as you would have read he was expecting a meeting with a worker to prove his point but the worker twisted some scripture and refused to meet him.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 18:24:30 GMT -5
This is the opening Mission Statement of Dialogue Ireland: Mission StatementExplanatory note: Whenever we use the words ‘cult’, ‘cultism’ or ‘cultist’ we are referring solely to the phenomenon where troubling levels of undue psychological influence may exist. This phenomenon can occur in almost any group or organisation.The above explanation should not be considered the "definition" of the words cult, etc. It should be recognized as Dialogue Ireland's standard of operation. Of course the 2x2s are cultic -- all churches are. And likewise, all cults can become unduly psychologically troubling -- like the capitalist groupie who tents on the sidewalk for a week to be the first one into Wal-Mart when a new telephone goes on sale at midnight. It is organizations like Dialogue Ireland that makes it difficult to have conversations about what constitutes a "dangerous" cult. It's not really the belief system that makes a group a "dangerous" cult, it is how people within the group treat each other that makes it dangerous. And one has to admit that nothing about the 2x2 belief system is inherently any more dangerous than any mainstream Christian church. Even the fact that an outsider despises the belief system of a group, still does not make the group a "dangerous" cult. My thoughts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 18:45:05 GMT -5
Who said he is a cult expert? Note: He refers to the 2x2s under cultism rather than using the word cult which the explanatory note refers to them being the same thing. And as you would have read he was expecting a meeting with a worker to prove his point but the worker twisted some scripture and refused to meet him. Here is the statement by the Trinity Theological Society: " He is Ireland’s leading cult expert and was featured heavily on the TV3 program exposing the house of prayer last year." trinitytheologicalsociety.com/events/mike-garde-combating-cults-dialogue-ireland-and-freedom-of-choice/Here is his CV: CV Mike Garde BD, MA, H Dip. ED, CPE is a Theologian and Cult Expert who was born in South Africa, but has lived most of his life in Ireland. He received an MA in Theology in 2006 from the Milltown Institute in Dublin, on the Magnificat Meal Movement, a traditionalist Catholic Movement centred on devotion to the Eucharist and devotion to the Virgin Mary which has evolved into Cultist movement. He visited Helidon, near Brisbane Australia where the MMM is located in 2003. Read the thesis here as a Word document SPIRITUALITY AND CULTISM or PDF: SPIRITUALITY AND CULTISM-1 dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/05/24/anniversary-of-ma-thesis-on-mmm/He is currently the Director of Dialogue Ireland an independent Charitable Trust which researches Cultism. Here you will find our evolution and history: dialogueireland.wordpress.com/about/history-of-dialogue-ireland/You will find our Mission Statement below: dialogueireland.wordpress.com/about/We can not stress enough that we are not concerned about beliefs but how people can lose their critical faculties under influence: dialogueireland.wordpress.com/about/cultism/“Generally Dialogue Ireland does not call any groups cults, but prefers the terms ‘cultism’ and ‘cultist’ to describe movements which are causing concern. Others feel that one should call a spade a spade – “CULT”. Dialogue Ireland sees the term as being on a continuum, and looks at attitudes and tendencies in religions, churches, movements, individuals, government, banks and corporations which are decidedly cultist. In order to get at this some use the term cultish, or cultic.” He is an associate member of FECRIS, a European wide federation of those concerned about Cultism, and is involved in Thought Reform Consultancy, providing information to the public and the media on Cultism. The main focus of his educational work is in providing Secondary School students with an educational encounter with Cultism to prepare them for the transition to College. He also holds a Diploma in Theology from University College, London (1973), Diploma in Theology from the Baptist College, Belfast, (1973), BD from the Pontifical University, St. Patrick’s, College, Maynooth, Co Kildare, Ireland (1975.) He was the first non Catholic to obtain a BD there. He received the H. Dip. ED from the National University of Ireland, (1976), Clinical Pastoral Education (CPE) Unit, Mater Hospital Dublin, 1992. He was part of the DCI, (Dialog Center International,) based in Aarhus, Denmark under the guidance of Dr. Johannes Aagaard, who up to his death in 2007 was one of the foremost experts in the study of Cults and a pioneer in the field. One of the most significant developments is that of the development of our blog which allows the victims of cultism the opportunity to address their experiences with cultist groups. Web site: www.dialogueireland.orgOur web site is in reality an archive and is one of the paths to getting to our blog: and our blog: dialogueireland.wordpress.comA flavour of his work and the experience of dealing with groups whose Charitable Status is questionable can be gained by looking through our annual reports which are online. dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/dialogue-ireland-annual-report-2011/dialogueireland.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/dialogue-ireland-report-2012.pdfThe most important legal judgement in our work in protecting the Human rights of the public and our freedom of expression was this judgement by Justice Hogan in September 2013. dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/final-version-cornec-v-morrice-rsjudgment-by-hogan-j/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 18:52:50 GMT -5
This is the opening Mission Statement of Dialogue Ireland: Mission StatementExplanatory note: Whenever we use the words ‘cult’, ‘cultism’ or ‘cultist’ we are referring solely to the phenomenon where troubling levels of undue psychological influence may exist. This phenomenon can occur in almost any group or organisation.The above explanation should not be considered the "definition" of the words cult, etc. It should be recognized as Dialogue Ireland's standard of operation. Of course the 2x2s are cultic -- all churches are. And likewise, all cults can become unduly psychologically troubling -- like the capitalist groupie who tents on the sidewalk for a week to be the first one into Wal-Mart when a new telephone goes on sale at midnight. It is organizations like Dialogue Ireland that makes it difficult to have conversations about what constitutes a "dangerous" cult. It's not really the belief system that makes a group a "dangerous" cult, it is how people within the group treat each other that makes it dangerous. And one has to admit that nothing about the 2x2 belief system is inherently any more dangerous than any mainstream Christian church. Even the fact that an outsider despises the belief system of a group, still does not make the group a "dangerous" cult. My thoughts. He said it is not a "cultist" group, but he didn't say it wasn't a "cultic" group. I'm sure that in his world, there is a difference of some significance. Personally, I find the myriad of cult-words and cult definitions a bit mind boggling at times. In this particular case, Mr.Garde focuses on cultism as a human rights issue while Irvine Grey focused on it as a theological issue, so it gets complicateder and complicateder all the time but I think I have a handle on their differences. However, I would expect there many more facets of the diamond that cultism is! Anyway, he did state that it is not a "cultist group" under any definition, so I presume he knows what he is talking about......or not.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2014 19:09:49 GMT -5
My understanding is that the friends and workers are a cult: "A relatively small number of people that separates itself from a larger number of people by having their own culture that makes an obvious difference between the two groups, though they may seem to have a certain in common aspect to their cultures. The cult might have a leader (person or smaller group) that benefits by having the power/authority and/or the finances." The powers-that-be workers have the power/authority and influence on the finances.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 19:22:50 GMT -5
My understanding is that the friends and workers are a cult: "A relatively small number of people that separates itself from a larger number of people by having their own culture that makes an obvious difference between the two groups, though they may seem to have a certain in common aspect to their cultures. The cult might have a leader (person or smaller group) that benefits by having the power/authority and/or the finances." The powers-that-be workers have the power/authority and influence on the finances. That's a common understanding of "religious" cults. But if you consider all the uses of the word "cult" and other terms derived from the word, it's quite clear that religious people are obsessed with defining the word only in negative connotations. It's safer and fairer to call the 2x2s a "dangerous" cult, if you need to present it that way, than to just call it a "cult". I say this because for people who want to do objective research into cults and religions, they need the broader definition to distinguish cultic aspects and non-cultic practices. In the 2x2s, for example, 2x2 ministry is a cultic belief, black stockings is not a cultic belief.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 19:32:06 GMT -5
My understanding is that the friends and workers are a cult: "A relatively small number of people that separates itself from a larger number of people by having their own culture that makes an obvious difference between the two groups, though they may seem to have a certain in common aspect to their cultures. The cult might have a leader (person or smaller group) that benefits by having the power/authority and/or the finances." The powers-that-be workers have the power/authority and influence on the finances. ALL churches and religions have a leader/founder as you described above.... Are all of them a Cult? Jesus was a leader/founder of the 1st century church. Was Jesus and his follower a Cult?Anything, religions or otherwise, that has a core object or personality or doctrine that is a defining characteristic of the group, is a cult. The 2x2s have: (1) Jesus Christ, (2) 2x2 ministry, (3) no name, (4) church in the home. These are defining cultic characteristics of the 2x2s, and distinguish them from other denominations.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 14, 2014 19:34:23 GMT -5
If the 2x2s were a cult, would they tolerate people like CD and me?
There are cultic attitudes and behaviours in the movement, but no more than the Baptist movement that Mr Irvine is part of.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 20:24:21 GMT -5
Dialogue Ireland gets complex in its definition of cultism so it's difficult to summarize it, but having read through some of their stuff, the best short summary I can make of it all is this:
Cultism is when a group or leaders of a group exert undue influence on the members to their detriment (detriment could be emotional, psychological, social, financial,etc). So it encompasses literally any possible group.
So the operative words above are "undue" and "detriment". Both have to be present. So a simple example would be when a member has to spend his/her day under the full compliance with a leader and, for instance, turn in all their earnings to the group. There is both undue influence and detriment in that example. So in the case of the 2x2 system, the question would be if the workers micromanage your life and if so, whether that micromanagement is detrimental to your health or welfare. Mr. Garde says it doesn't meet exceed his standard to qualify for cultism.
Irvine Grey looks at it entirely differently. He sets up the gold standard of his understanding of classical Christian Evangelicalism. That is his measuring stick. He views the 2x2's as sufficiently different from classical Christian Evangelicalism, and that qualifies the 2x2's as a cult......and a particularly dangerous too at that apparently.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2014 21:47:24 GMT -5
My understanding is that the friends and workers are a cult: "A relatively small number of people that separates itself from a larger number of people by having their own culture that makes an obvious difference between the two groups, though they may seem to have a certain in common aspect to their cultures. The cult might have a leader (person or smaller group) that benefits by having the power/authority and/or the finances." The powers-that-be workers have the power/authority and influence on the finances. ALL churches and religions have a leader/founder as you described above.... Are all of them a Cult? Jesus was a leader/founder of the 1st century church. Was Jesus and his follower a Cult?I do not consider the Catholic churches - Roman and Orthodox - as cults. They are quite big in number. I do not consider Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and such as cults. I think they are quite similar. I do not consider Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witness, and Latter Day Saints as cults. I think their size qualifies them for sect status. I see Jesus and his followers more as a gang of radicals, reformists than a cult. I see the very early "Jesus is God" church as a cult, but then it grew and became mainstream.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2014 21:49:34 GMT -5
If the 2x2s were a cult, would they tolerate people like CD and me? There are cultic attitudes and behaviours in the movement, but no more than the Baptist movement that Mr Irvine is part of. Are the views you express here widely known in the church?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 14, 2014 22:29:55 GMT -5
If the 2x2s were a cult, would they tolerate people like CD and me? There are cultic attitudes and behaviours in the movement, but no more than the Baptist movement that Mr Irvine is part of. Are the views you express here widely known in the church? Hard to know without conducting a poll. Depends on how you define "widely". I doubt I'd last very long in Irvine Grey's church if I spoke freely every Sunday.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2014 23:05:55 GMT -5
Are the views you express here widely known in the church? Hard to know without conducting a poll. Depends on how you define "widely". I doubt I'd last very long in Irvine Grey's church if I spoke freely every Sunday. Widely known for the F&W would be friends and workers under first level overseer, his overseer, and if there be another, his overseer.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 23:17:03 GMT -5
The above explanation should not be considered the "definition" of the words cult, etc. It should be recognized as Dialogue Ireland's standard of operation. Of course the 2x2s are cultic -- all churches are. And likewise, all cults can become unduly psychologically troubling -- like the capitalist groupie who tents on the sidewalk for a week to be the first one into Wal-Mart when a new telephone goes on sale at midnight. It is organizations like Dialogue Ireland that makes it difficult to have conversations about what constitutes a "dangerous" cult. It's not really the belief system that makes a group a "dangerous" cult, it is how people within the group treat each other that makes it dangerous. And one has to admit that nothing about the 2x2 belief system is inherently any more dangerous than any mainstream Christian church. Even the fact that an outsider despises the belief system of a group, still does not make the group a "dangerous" cult. My thoughts. He said it is not a "cultist" group, but he didn't say it wasn't a "cultic" group. I'm sure that in his world, there is a difference of some significance. Personally, I find the myriad of cult-words and cult definitions a bit mind boggling at times. In this particular case, Mr.Garde focuses on cultism as a human rights issue while Irvine Grey focused on it as a theological issue, so it gets complicateder and complicateder all the time but I think I have a handle on their differences. However, I would expect there many more facets of the diamond that cultism is! Anyway, he did state that it is not a "cultist group" under any definition, so I presume he knows what he is talking about......or not. They're both using the word "cult", not to promote any understanding of the word "cult", but rather to use it's derogatory connotation to label certain religions he is critical of. If they're the experts they proclaim themselves to be they will have learned the core definition of cult in whatever colleges they studied in.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 23:26:34 GMT -5
If the 2x2s were a cult, would they tolerate people like CD and me? There are cultic attitudes and behaviours in the movement, but no more than the Baptist movement that Mr Irvine is part of. Since you associate yourself with CD I expect the answer would be "yes". But like any other group, if you start rocking the boat too much they will throw you out. Every group/cult/whatever has to do that or they will never survive.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 23:37:07 GMT -5
Anything, religions or otherwise, that has a core object or personality or doctrine that is a defining characteristic of the group, is a cult. The 2x2s have: (1) Jesus Christ, (2) 2x2 ministry, (3) no name, (4) church in the home. These are defining cultic characteristics of the 2x2s, and distinguish them from other denominations. Jesus 1st century church: 1) Jesus Christ, the chief cornerstone, 2) 2x2 ministry, 3) had no name, 4) the followers met in the homes to celebrate/worship God, and Jesus...... Do you consider Jesus a cultic denomination as well?Not exactly. "Jesus" is not a "cultic denomination" -- Jesus was a person. But a belief in a specific definition of "Jesus Christ" (not Jesus) is the most common cultic element in all Christian denominations -- despite the fact that different denominations can have different definitions of "Jesus Christ". Because that belief is a non-negotiable part of the denomination makes it a cult of Christianity, rather than a cult of Elvis Presley.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 23:51:05 GMT -5
Dialogue Ireland gets complex in its definition of cultism so it's difficult to summarize it, but having read through some of their stuff, the best short summary I can make of it all is this: Cultism is when a group or leaders of a group exert undue influence on the members to their detriment (detriment could be emotional, psychological, social, financial,etc). So it encompasses literally any possible group. So the operative words above are "undue" and "detriment". Both have to be present. So a simple example would be when a member has to spend his/her day under the full compliance with a leader and, for instance, turn in all their earnings to the group. There is both undue influence and detriment in that example. So in the case of the 2x2 system, the question would be if the workers micromanage your life and if so, whether that micromanagement is detrimental to your health or welfare. Mr. Garde says it doesn't meet exceed his standard to qualify for cultism. Irvine Grey looks at it entirely differently. He sets up the gold standard of his understanding of classical Christian Evangelicalism. That is his measuring stick. He views the 2x2's as sufficiently different from classical Christian Evangelicalism, and that qualifies the 2x2's as a cult......and a particularly dangerous too at that apparently. Dialogue Ireland's real problem is that they use the word "undue". It's a subjective term to begin with, but they aren't that specific about what they consider undue either. The other word I noticed they used was "may" -- well, there isn't a denomination in existence that "cannot" surpass someone's concept of "undue". Who decides what is "undue"? And yes, Mr. Grey has established his own arbitrary definition of "cult" which, if someone of another denomination were to write about his denomination, could come to the same conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 14, 2014 23:59:08 GMT -5
ALL churches and religions have a leader/founder as you described above.... Are all of them a Cult? Jesus was a leader/founder of the 1st century church. Was Jesus and his follower a Cult?I do not consider the Catholic churches - Roman and Orthodox - as cults. They are quite big in number. I do not consider Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and such as cults. I think they are quite similar. I do not consider Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witness, and Latter Day Saints as cults. I think their size qualifies them for sect status. I see Jesus and his followers more as a gang of radicals, reformists than a cult. I see the very early "Jesus is God" church as a cult, but then it grew and became mainstream. But: if it's organized around an adoration of anything, it is a cult, by definition. It has nothing to do with numbers. It's interesting how the Friends will go about recognizing each other when they don't know for sure. "Excuse me, are you a friend of George Walker?" A regional icon of the 2x2 cult -- not a thing derogatory about it, but identifies a person with a "specific" cultic group. I love it when someone gets an answer like, "No, I'm a Mennonite."
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 15, 2014 0:01:36 GMT -5
ALL churches and religions have a leader/founder as you described above.... Are all of them a Cult? Jesus was a leader/founder of the 1st century church. Was Jesus and his follower a Cult?I do not consider the Catholic churches - Roman and Orthodox - as cults. T hey are quite big in number.I do not consider Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and such as cults. I think they are quite similar.I do not consider Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witness, and Latter Day Saints as cults. I think their size qualifies them for sect status. I see Jesus and his followers more as a gang of radicals, reformists than a cult. I see the very early "Jesus is God" church as a cult, but then it grew and became mainstream. Greg, so are you defining "cults' or "no cults" as to how large they are?
I think that you are right. At least I think that is the way the older larger churches view the smaller newer churches.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 15, 2014 1:23:14 GMT -5
I do not consider the Catholic churches - Roman and Orthodox - as cults. T hey are quite big in number.I do not consider Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and such as cults. I think they are quite similar.I do not consider Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witness, and Latter Day Saints as cults. I think their size qualifies them for sect status. I see Jesus and his followers more as a gang of radicals, reformists than a cult. I see the very early "Jesus is God" church as a cult, but then it grew and became mainstream. Greg, so are you defining "cults' or "no cults" as to how large they are?
I think that you are right. At least I think that is the way the older larger churches view the smaller newer churches.
I found it interesting that a Catholic priest I had as a professor would discuss the "cultic developments" in the Catholic church. It helped me change my use of the word.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2014 7:20:25 GMT -5
Dialogue Ireland gets complex in its definition of cultism so it's difficult to summarize it, but having read through some of their stuff, the best short summary I can make of it all is this: Cultism is when a group or leaders of a group exert undue influence on the members to their detriment (detriment could be emotional, psychological, social, financial,etc). So it encompasses literally any possible group. So the operative words above are "undue" and "detriment". Both have to be present. So a simple example would be when a member has to spend his/her day under the full compliance with a leader and, for instance, turn in all their earnings to the group. There is both undue influence and detriment in that example. So in the case of the 2x2 system, the question would be if the workers micromanage your life and if so, whether that micromanagement is detrimental to your health or welfare. Mr. Garde says it doesn't meet exceed his standard to qualify for cultism. Irvine Grey looks at it entirely differently. He sets up the gold standard of his understanding of classical Christian Evangelicalism. That is his measuring stick. He views the 2x2's as sufficiently different from classical Christian Evangelicalism, and that qualifies the 2x2's as a cult......and a particularly dangerous too at that apparently. Dialogue Ireland's real problem is that they use the word "undue". It's a subjective term to begin with, but they aren't that specific about what they consider undue either. The other word I noticed they used was "may" -- well, there isn't a denomination in existence that "cannot" surpass someone's concept of "undue". Who decides what is "undue"? And yes, Mr. Grey has established his own arbitrary definition of "cult" which, if someone of another denomination were to write about his denomination, could come to the same conclusion. The definition of cultism using "undue" is in my synthesized definition. Dialogue Ireland doesn't seem to have a succinct definition of cultism so "undue" is what I think they agree with. It's definitely subjective, but it just recognizes that negligible influence will never be sufficiently detrimental to be problematic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2014 7:38:43 GMT -5
ALL churches and religions have a leader/founder as you described above.... Are all of them a Cult? Jesus was a leader/founder of the 1st century church. Was Jesus and his follower a Cult?I do not consider the Catholic churches - Roman and Orthodox - as cults. They are quite big in number. I do not consider Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and such as cults. I think they are quite similar. I do not consider Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witness, and Latter Day Saints as cults. I think their size qualifies them for sect status. I see Jesus and his followers more as a gang of radicals, reformists than a cult. I see the very early "Jesus is God" church as a cult, but then it grew and became mainstream. I think you have to be careful about using "small" in your definition. Most definitions use "small" as a typical identifying feature but if you drill down into the definition, you will find that it is not a feature that actually makes them a cult, it is just that cults are usually small by nature. The primary idea in many definitions is to be in a group offbeat from the mainstream and just by human nature, usually only a relatively small number of people are interested in being offbeat from the mainstream......we tend to be pack animals and run with the crowd. If you do use "small" as a necessary part of your definition, then maybe you should consider that JW's form a distinct, non-mainstream position in Christianity and comprise .4% of the total. That seems really small to me. SDA's are .9% of Christianity....also relatively small. Now Presbyterianism, including their Reformed offshoots make up only 3.75% of total Christianity. Could that be small enough to qualify for being cult? It seems to be that any group under 10% of the total is a small group in the big picture.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 15, 2014 14:23:48 GMT -5
Dialogue Ireland's real problem is that they use the word "undue". It's a subjective term to begin with, but they aren't that specific about what they consider undue either. The other word I noticed they used was "may" -- well, there isn't a denomination in existence that "cannot" surpass someone's concept of "undue". Who decides what is "undue"? And yes, Mr. Grey has established his own arbitrary definition of "cult" which, if someone of another denomination were to write about his denomination, could come to the same conclusion. The definition of cultism using "undue" is in my synthesized definition. Dialogue Ireland doesn't seem to have a succinct definition of cultism so "undue" is what I think they agree with. It's definitely subjective, but it just recognizes that negligible influence will never be sufficiently detrimental to be problematic. You sounded so much like what they wrote I thought you were quoting them But their end conclusion does no damage, as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2014 17:46:09 GMT -5
The definition of cultism using "undue" is in my synthesized definition. Dialogue Ireland doesn't seem to have a succinct definition of cultism so "undue" is what I think they agree with. It's definitely subjective, but it just recognizes that negligible influence will never be sufficiently detrimental to be problematic. You sounded so much like what they wrote I thought you were quoting them But their end conclusion does no damage, as far as I'm concerned. Thanks. Since the last post here, I did find a post on DI where Mike Garde affirmed that "undue influence" is an ingredient of his idea of cultism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2014 21:03:03 GMT -5
i find cults to have the following traits
1. a single leader 2. bizzare sexual doctrine 3. bizzare financial doctrine 4. anti-gov't/authority belief 5. obsessed with weapons 6. live in communes or compounds
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 15, 2014 21:20:37 GMT -5
i find cults to have the following traits 1. a single leader 2. bizzare sexual doctrine 3. bizzare financial doctrine 4. anti-gov't/authority belief 5. obsessed with weapons 6. live in communes or compounds Some cults are like this, but none of these things are necessary for a religious cult. A dangerous religious cult may well have some of these characteristics.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Jun 15, 2014 22:02:41 GMT -5
If the 2x2s were a cult, would they tolerate people like CD and me? There are cultic attitudes and behaviours in the movement, but no more than the Baptist movement that Mr Irvine is part of. I think it would depend on how outspoken you are! ken
|
|