| Author | Message | ||
| Tony |
Hi all, What is your definition of a "cult"? With warm Christian love, Tony Valentino | ||
| Miquel |
It is difficult to provide an exhaustive definition. The designation requires a subjective value judgment. The origin of the word "cult" can be traced to the Latin "cultus" which has a connotation of all that is involved in worship-ritual, emotion, liturgy and attitude. One modern definition generally understood is that which "indicates morally reprehensible practices or beliefs which significantly depart from historic Christianity." A cult generally will (a) demote God, (b) devalue Jesus Christ, (c) deify man, (d) deny sin and (e) denigrate Scripture. In Dr. Walter Martin's book, The Kingdom of The Cults, he defines a cult as, "any religious group which differs significantly in some one or more respects as to belief or practice from those religious groups which are regarded as the normatice expression of religion in our total culture." He continues, "I might add to this that a cult might also be defined as a group of people gathered about a specific person or person's interpretation of the Bible." With this, he sites examples, using, Jehovah's Witnesses, following the intrepretations of Charles T. Russell and James Rutherford, The Christian Scientist, citing those who follow the interpretations of Mary Baker Eddy and the Mormons, whos follow the interpretations found in the writings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. Dr. Martin took exception with Dr. Hoekema's contention that SDA's were cults in four basic areas, however, the main aspect was that moderate SDA's as is the official position of the church, that SDA's do not consider EGW as an extra-Biblical authority, but that her writings are only authoritative in those areas where they are in agreement with the Word of God which is the final standard for judging all the gifts of the spirit. Although there are those Historical SDA's that I would consider cultic because their view of Scripture is interpreted in light of the writings of EGW. | ||
| Colleentinker |
Actually, in the 27 Fundamentals, Adventists do say EGW is a continuing and authoritative source of doctrine. They make no distinction between her writings that agree with the Bible and those that don't. Further, a church that considers a prophet or messenger authoritative in any sense when some of her writings do not agree with the Bible is suspect. Why would a church honor a person who is sometimes scriptural and sometimes not? What reliable function would such a person have for the health of the Body of Christ? Whether or not the official position of the church sees Ellen as an extra-biblical authority, the practical reality is that without her, the church would lose its foundation. In reality they actually do see her as a continuing authority. In the spring of 1998 Angel Rodriguez of the GC said at a Worker's Meeting in the NPUC that without the investigative judgment there is no reason for the Seventh-day Adventist church to exist. (I personally heard him say it on a tape of the meeting, and it's quoted in Aventist Today.) It's a stretch to see how a mainstream Christian church could hold onto a dubious prophet whose writings "are only authoritative in those areas where they are in agreement with the Word of God which is the final standard for judging all the gifts of the spirit." (quoted from above) If her writings are only partially authoritative, she cannot be considered reliable. If she is only authoritative when she agrees with the Bible, then the church should be able to jettison her and lose nothing. If, however, she is authoritative even in areas where she does NOT agree with the Bible, then the church would lose much if it jettisoned her. Colleen | ||
| Darrell |
Or gain much . . . ? | ||
| Loneviking |
The other sneaky argument that is sometimes is advanced is that EGW was there for 'edification'. In other words, God showed her how the string of truth was laid out in the Bible enabling her to connect the various texts together to support SDA'isms unique doctrines. By saying this, they claim the Bible as their ultimate authority but say EGW was responsible for showing how all of the pieces of the puzzle fit together. I wish I had my EGW biographies here, but there is a quote to that exact effect, by EGW, from one of her manuscripts that is in the biography by Arthur White. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Y'all, I just had to come in from a project and share a thought. What BIG thing did the pharasee's and the SDA's have in common. RIGIDITY. Picture this situation with a non-christian or a person searching for God. I have to go to Ca. to take a load of stuff down. I want to go to Church at 9:30 am (Sunday). Mom is going with me. It takes 3 1/2 t0 4 hrs to get there. If we left at 3 or 4 in the afternoon, we would get there at a reasonable time to unload and get a good night rest and be well refreshed for Church the next morning. Well, I have a kink in my plan now. Mom will not travel on the Sabbath. Now my options are: Leave at dark-thirty (after 8pm) and get there around midnight and unload in the morning and rush off to Church! Grrrrrrrr OR leave at 4 am and get there about 8 am and unload, get cleaned up and dressed and rush off to Church! Grrrrrrrr THAT IS RIDGID!!!! I can't think of any place in the Bible where Jesus imposes that kind of RIGIDITY. Can you? Now, I DO understand where she is coming from as I was raised in that mind set as a 3rd generation. BUT what would that non-christian or person searching for God think of religion or God. Someone posted about the reason that people in other less fortunate countries run to SDAism is because they are hungry for ANYTHING. Here in this country, people are able to see a little better because they don't have the poverty etc blinding them. I'm continually amazed at the amount of gospel believing Christians out there. I run into them all the time at work. Just wonderful people. In fact they are part of the reason I came to the Lord after being out of "Church" for 20 years. In 16 years of working construction and being around zillions of people, I met my first SDA on the job last year!! Guess what!!! He was recently from South America and was converted to SDAism there!!!!! Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Upward and onward.........Maryann | ||
| Lori |
There is a good article on the definition of a cult at this website: http://www.leaderu.com/common/cults.html | ||
| Chyna |
lori, great link :) i just had a discussion with two adventist friends. one was saying that all religions arrive to mainstream acceptance the same way, from cult to sect to acceptance. i don't jive with it but oh well, but this is interesting. i'll word it the way i see it from my opinion. ___ Some people say, "The only difference between a cult and a religion is a hundred years," but they blur a vast distinction between the two. There is a sizable body of literature on cults, so I will attempt to summarize the defining characteristics under four headings, using the acronym CULT: well, Adventism sounds like a modified version of this: C Cut off from the world. Cult leaders and followers are isolated and cut off from normal interaction with people outside the group. They do not have the corrective influence of other perspectives. They lose their ability, and their desire, to verify information the cult gives them. They become alienated from family and friends and have an unhealthy need to belong to the cult group. the difference is many adventists are born into Adventism and solely become close knit with other adventists, but isolation, yes! U Undernourished--poor nutritional intake and sleep deprivation often characterizes cult members. They are near exhaustion and their resistance is low, so they can be easily manipulated, deceived, and exploited. Inadequate nutrition and sleep is disguised as a special practice or diet to improve health or advance spirituality. well, diet is certainly emphasized, but not to this extreme. L Leadership is authoritarian and coercive. The leader claims divinity or special knowledge and authority from God, and often uses deception and has hidden objectives. Unquestioning obedience is expected. This leads the cult follower into total dependence upon the cult for belief, behavior, and practice. He or she loses personal freedom and the ability to make choices. in some SDA churches it does seem like criticism of EGW is a sin. T Theology or beliefs of a cult always involve some unique or new perspectives, and they claim that truth is only found in what the cult says. Cults often promote the "we/they" syndrome, which also keeps members dependent and loyal to the cult. hm, yes, SDA possesses a number of 'unique' doctrines. conclusion? SDA is definitely cult-like, but not a cult. they are extremely loyal though. *sigh* in Him, Chyna | ||
| Patti |
Chyna, I think you are being overly generous to the cult of Ellen. Which is proper for one coming from the outside. In fact, my mother and I were discussing this today. I believe that SDAism is an even more treacherous and insidious cult than the more obvious ones, such as JWs, LDS. Here is why I believe this: 1. The SDA leadership has tried to groom and package itself to appear as evangelical and orthodox as possible. They did their best snow job on Walter Martin. 2. They have been known to hide their true identity, as in the Revelation seminars, until the last few days of the series. (I have personally received these brochures in which there is no mention made of the SDA church and the meetings are held in a rented hall so that they could not be immediately associated with an SDA church.) 3. There is a bit of dishonesty about their use of Ellen. Outwardly, they deny dependence upon Ellen White, but anyone who has been raised SDA and who has studied into the beliefs with any depth at all knows that all of the unique doctrines of the SDA church come from Ellen. There is more denial of the dependence upon Ellen than there used to be. That is, they have tried to improve their public appearance, the ministers have been told not to quote Ellen so much, but the spirit remains the same. Just because her name is not mentioned so often as when I was a child, perhaps, does not mean that the fundamentals of the church were not set in place and solidified by Ellen. Without Ellen, there would be no SDAism. 4. The SDA Gospel is a Roman Catholic gospel, the "other gospel" Paul speaks of in Galatians. It is a gospel of faith in Jesus Christ plus our own works. The SDAs are very uncomfortable should you say that "The doing and dying of Jesus Christ is totally sufficient for our salvation." They will quickly continue with a "Yes, but..." and tell us how we must ______________ <--(whatever, fill in the blank). This is virtually identical with the Roman Catholic gospel. The only difference between the two is that the RCC believes in the divinity and absolutely sinless perfection of Jesus Christ, whereas the prevailing SDA view is that Jesus, although divine, still had a sinful nature just like you and me. The SDAs were Arian, you know, (believing that Jesus Christ was a created being, therefore not fully God) up until the late 1800's. There are still vestiges of this belief lingering as in the view that Jesus Christ is the archangel Michael. But this is yet another doctrine which the SDAs have "cleaned up" to make themselves more presentable to the world. 5. The SDAs claim a pure lineage, untainted by the sins of Rome. While they purport Protestantism, they deny that they came out of Rome. Which is truly absurd since that is where all Protestants come from. Instead, Ellen creates a lineage of "sabbath-keeping" dissidents dating all the way back to the early Christian church from which SDAs came. Although she claims that these isolated religious groups, such as the Waldenses, kept the seventh-day sabbath, history does not back her up. In fact, a history written by a Waldensian speaks of their observance of, among other Sundays, Whitsunday. But Ellen claims otherwise. 6. Mingling outside the walls of SDAism is discouraged. Over and over again the text "be ye not unequally yoked with unbelievers" is quoted. As a child, I was encouraged not to attend other churches, to associate with non-believers, and to befriend (or marry) anyone outside the church. One of the things I felt most deeply when I left SDAism was the freedom to love and accept my fellow man without suspicion and wariness. 7. Even keeping the sabbath is not enough. Although, as it was pointed out in another thread, the sabbath commandment is regarded (in actuality, although it is denied) above all others, keeping the sabbath is not enough to make a person a member of God's remnant church. SDAs look down upon SDBs, WWCGs, and other sabbatarian denominations because they do not have (please forgive me--this phrase still gives me hives) "the spirit of prophecy." So when it comes right down to it, the sabbath is not THE test of faith, but belief in Ellen. They speak of people "leaving the truth" when they go to another Protestant denomination, EVEN a sabbatarian denomination. 8. Ellen (and thus, SDAism) teaches that all of Protestantism follows after Rome (Sunday-keeping) and are, therefore, daughters of the great harlot. THIS IS SPEAKING OF FELLOW PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS! Is it any wonder that most people who leave SDAism go to agnosticism or another cult? 9. They cannot trust their fellow Christians, because, after all, someday, they will want to incarcerate, persecute, and execute them for keeping the sabbath/not keeping Sunday. Et cetera, ad nauseum.... The thing that makes SDAism more insidious, is that they try to veil their cultic tendencies, keeping their controversial beliefs among themselves, showing a evangelical picture to the world, one that would be more likely to be accepted among the Protestants whom they try to proselytize (Converting Christians to SDAism? Are there not enough non-Christians to worry about?), but having a much different outlook from the inside. With the Mormons and JWs, their error is blatant and apparant from the offset; but SDAs try to package their unique doctrines under a generic Christian label, trying to delay the moment of revelation until the hook is firmly planted. Enjoy conversing with you. Grace and peace always, Patti | ||
| Chyna |
i see where you are coming from patti, my sda boyfriend didn't tell me what his actual doctrines were until i hounded him the last month of our relationship (of a year). the first week i went out with my sda boyfriend i told him flat out i never was going to be adventist and that i would *not* raise my children adventist or vegetarian. he didn't tell me until we broke up that he had thought that i would just 'change' to adventism hearing the truth of it. *big sigh* he didn't tell me that he wanted to raise his children adventist at that point in time because it would have been the death knell in our relationship. i do agree with him on certain things though. there seems to be a great variety of SDA's and to varying degrees they subscribe to the heterodoxical doctrines they espouse. my ex-b/f told me he didn't feel like i could accept him as a mainstream Christian. i was like "you are not a mainstream Christian" until the adventist church does serious revising of doctrine and cultural practices, it will never be accepted as such. i believe there is an extreme side of adventism and a gentler side of adventism and for me, i hope not to estrange those who are truly under grace in hopes to coax them to more truths that the church has blocked out from them by EGW. as for reaching to current SDA's, i feel that truth in love is the best outreach possible. and prayer :). i do agree with you on your points, but the shocker label of 'cult' i believe does more to make adventists more stubborn about their beliefs rather than questioning them. enjoyin' right back, Chyna | ||
| Colleentinker |
Patti, I agree with you. I remember, Chyna, when I first tentatively attached the label to "cult" to Adventism a couple years ago. I heard another, longer-term former Adventist call it that, and I recoiled slightly. The longer I have been out, however, the more firmly I believe it is a cult. As Patti says, it is more insidious than most of them. They masquerade really well as evangelical Christians. It's really only upon close observation that we begin to see that the doctrines are not just heterodoxical, they're heretical. The clincher for me was the understanding that Adventists are not clear about the nature of Christ. That combined with the incomplete atonement and the uncertainty that we can be saved until the second coming has convinced me that Adventism really is a cult. At its core, Adventism is unbiblical. It does not teach the pure gospel. Praise God for rescuing us! Colleen | ||
| Chyna |
a site classifying SDA a cult | ||
| Chyna |
another really good site Seventh Day Adventism it was an intelligent page. i liked how it referred to the "special" club attitude |
