[smvoice]

It seems you've run out of anything of value to say. The indefensible teachings and beliefs of the RCC has left you with nothing but a stick and a Moe-Poke to defend that "great institution of religious ideas". What's left to say? You cannot defend her with Scripture. Your own CC, writings of the "early church fathers", and "history" of the RCC that are actually TRUE AND ADMITTED could fit on the back of a cocktail napkin. With room left for a few creeds which strangely leave out the Gospel of Christ.

What is the Catholic definition of a cult? Do you know?

[D-fendr]

I’m afraid your mind reading skills need more work; they’re still over-powered by wishful thinking.

The Christian Church will continue to include the ministry of Christ as always prevailing against the gates of hell as well as lesser lights.

The charm of the “great discoveries” of 20th Century Darbyism will continue to appeal to some; then, likely as with other fads, disappear into the sea of obviously bad “what were we thinking?” exegesis.

Your constant attacks on the Church may hide the hole left by Christ’s teaching for a while, but, not forever. Your apparently compulsive fervor to attack the Church reveals a great deal. May you someday take clear look at it. Maybe then…

pax tecum.

[caww]

What is the Catholic definition of a cult?

Well I can say this...."When a Christian uses the word 'Cult', and that not generally speaking but as a Christian,... a cult is defined as that which claims to be rooted in Historic Christianity but has deviated or abandoned the finished work of Christ... or compromised on His person.

It is critical we understand Jesus said we are complete in Him, and when you add or detract from you can give yourself whatever 'name' you want but you're denying the finished work of Christ on the cross. Therefore it's not Historic Christianity at that point."

(Ravi Zacharias)

One of the very best descriptions of a cult I've noted because the "Centrality of Christ" cannot be compromised.