Chick Publications
ORLY??
No...it’s not a cult.
Yes.
I agree with the author, Catholicism is NOT a cult and Mormonism is.
And “chick tracts” are just creepy.
Interesting. Most of those cult accusers are based their leader’s vision of salvation.
How about this, I believe most humans to be hypocrites. This whole lent thing is too funny for me. As a line cook I find it funny that people, for 40 some days, give something up. How about acting like this all year long ? Hypocrisy has taken ahold of our faiths. Time to pray and worship privately. Seriously, the whole concept of I’ll teach you the word of god, now donate is the same way I don’t like Charity groups. I know it’s a harsh view to take and I’ll answer for that later but I at least am willing to acknowledge religious groups in general are starting to lose their ways. I’d rather pray and communicate with god while laying in my bed and from the heart then telling someone my “sins” for the week. Again, my opinion.
Do you own a flame suit?
“Organizations and individuals (some of them quite popular) who classify Catholicism as a cult include:
“Chick Publications,” - run by a man who is clearly nuts.
“Alberto Rivera’s Anti-Christ Information Center,” - Rivera was shown to be a fraud by his fellow anti-Catholic Protestants.
“Tony Alamo’s Christian Foundation,” - Look up his recent arrest and conviction and you’ll know all you need to know.
“Bill Jackson’s Christians Evangelizing Catholics,” - clearly an idiot, a lying idiot, if you look at his website you’ll see why.
“Albert James Dager’s Media Spotlight,” - don’t know him, but if this is his company, well...
“and Dave Hunt’s The Berean Call” - I read his book. I have never seen so many deliberate distortions crammed into so few pages.
Of course not. It’s just a version of Christianity with the power hierarchy altered slightly; most denominations say that God is all powerful, but here a priest can call down Jesus at will and put him in a cookie.
We are drowning in labels. The term “cult” is often used as a contentless pejorative term, like “fundamentalist.” I don’t even use words like “Calvinist.” If I call myself a Calvinist, then this implies I am following the teachings of a mere man. Most of what Calvin taught is in the Bible, and it is unfortunate that his name has become associated with it.
I will permit two sets of labels: “believer” and “unbeliever,” or “lost” and “saved.” It refreshingly clarifies the whole discussion.
Exhibit A for the case for the New Atheism
For me, Mass was enshrouded with man-made pomp; outdated tradition having nothing to do with scripture which branded Christ in the church’s vision, effectively making Him only accessible through men of cloth.
My service with the Church of Christ, stripped away the denominational traditions and focused on scripture - creating and allowing a substantive relationship with Christ.
Mass was a good physical workout. Scriptural fundamentals are a good spiritual workout. The latter is far more rigorous to me.
Cult Shmult. A person might only ask “Is my faith word of God based or word of man based?”
(PS - Does anyone know why the book of Mormon is written in Old English style?)
I consider it to be a false version of Christianity, but not a “cult”, at least not in the popularly held conception of what a “cult” is.
Bad theology (worship and adoration and prayer to saints and Mary, salvation by works, transubstantiation, giving the pope the title of “Holy Father” which Christ addressed God the Father with, etc), alone does not make a religion a cult.
Cults use mind control and other forms of coercion to get their members to obey and behave in ways they normally would not. I do not believe this is the case with either the RCC or the LDS (though the LDS comes closer in this regard.)
I would consider groups like the JWs, Scientologists, Unification Church and ICC (if it still exists) to be true cults, in the sociological sense.
I’d also say that there are some groups with theology much closer to biblical teachings than the RCC that are far more cult-like than the RCC. If the RCC were a cult you would not see such a high percentage of “cafeteria Catholics” who choose the teaching they like and leave the rest, or pro-abortion Catholic politicians. A cult would not tolerate such dissent from its members.
Mr. Samples conclusions regarding Roman Catholicism are false as is much of the “criteria”that he uses for determining and defining a “christian” cult. Even where his criteria is correct, his conclusions are incorrect because he fails to apply his own criteria in reaching his conclusion. An example of this can be found in criteria number 2: “ Cults are usually formed, molded, and controlled by a single individual or small group.” A simple examination of Roman Catholic history and official RC doctrine demonstrates that the “popes” and “ongoing magisterium” fit this criteria.
I’ll ask all my protestant brothers and sisters standing with this papist mackeral snapper at the pro-life prayer vigil this 40 days.
I think we all have better things to do than snipe at one another in the Name of Christ.
NO
Read the Religion Moderator's Guidelines for Religion Forum Threads