Republicans mired in death cult

arthwollipot said:
Yes, it started when you referred to the rapture as a cult.

Which it isn't.
Click to expand...

You are correct, arthwollipot. The rapture isn't a cult. End times belief is a cult. It's a rather unimportant semantic point.
 
uke2se said:
You are correct, arthwollipot. The rapture isn't a cult. End times belief is a cult. It's a rather unimportant semantic point.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, but I was bored.

Certain cults may include end-times belief as part of their doctrine, but I wouldn't call end-times belief itself a cult. A belief isn't an organisation any more than an event is.
 
arthwollipot said:
Well, yes, but I was bored.

Certain cults may include end-times belief as part of their doctrine, but I wouldn't call end-times belief itself a cult. A belief isn't an organisation any more than an event is.
Click to expand...

Still bored?
:D
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
But they need Armageddon to show us they were right and punish us for not believing them, plus then Jesus comes back to rule over a peaceful Earth for 1,000 years.

Or they all get raptured. I get my Bible nonsense mixed up.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think those are two different interpretations of Book of Revelations nonsense. OTOH, I'm not quite sure how anybody ever managed to make any sense at all out of the Book of Revelations. It reads like it was written by somebody who had way to many of the wrong kind of mushrooms.
 
There have been so many End-of-the-World predictions, at some point the Universe will just give in and implode, because it is the only way to stop the hassling.
 
1. It's Revelation, not Revelations.
2. The Rapture isn't in the Bible, it was a new idea of relatively recent invention, and remains confined to a subset of Protestant denominations.
 
arthwollipot has a long history on these forums of claiming words have specific definitions in order to fit his agenda.

His claims on this page of what a cult is, or entails, are entirely fabricated in support of a transparent agenda.

A cult is simply "a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object". (From my trusty old Oxford.) FULL STOP.

Christians are in a creator cult. They venerate and devote a magical sky being that they think created everything. Muslims and many other religions are also creator cults. Hilariously enough they each think that every other religion than themselves is a cult. A derogatory meaning has been attempted to be attached to the word for those very reasons (as you can see in the below wiki). But, rest assured, to a logical sociologist the word always was, and shall remain, "value-free".


https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/cult

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult


The rapture is a belief of several branches of several creator cults. Not just Christianity. And the rapture is very much a suicidal wet dream for many of those cults.



It's exactly like drug addicts. An alcoholic thinks that all other drug addicts are drug addicts, but not themselves, oh no, not their drug of choice alcohol. Nicotine addicts and most other addicts have the same thought process. And this is exactly how religious people are, only their dumbass religion is the "true one"... everyone else is in a cult. In fact, thinking that way is pretty much required. How else can you lie to yourself and think that you are not a drug addict and/or not in a cult.
 
This is The End said:
arthwollipot has a long history on these forums of claiming words have specific definitions in order to fit his agenda.

His claims on this page of what a cult is, or entails, are entirely fabricated in support of a transparent agenda.
Click to expand...
I literally posted a link to someone else's definition in post #33. I didn't make it up.

This is The End said:
A cult is simply "a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object". (From my trusty old Oxford.) FULL STOP.
Click to expand...
What additional definitions does the Oxford give me? Oh look, definition number 1.2. "A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members."

Merriam-Webster gives me "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious". The Macquarie says "a religious or pseudo-religious movement, characterised by the extreme devotion of its members, who usually form a relatively small, tightly controlled group under an authoritarian and charismatic leader" and specifically flags it as derogatory. From the Collins I see "a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents" so don't you go using argumentum ad dictionarium at me. My dictionary-fu is better than yours.

The word "cult" carries a lot more emotional baggage than a single simplistic dictionary definition will suggest. Common usage is that when used to describe a religious or quasi-religious organisation it suggests that the group is sinister and there are shady dealings going on. It suggests sexual exploitation. It suggests Jim Jones, Branch Davidians and Heaven's Gate. Using the word to describe all religion is inaccurate and contrary to common English usage.

But I suspect you're just using it as a way to be deliberately insulting, so I guess that's par for the course.
 
arthwollipot said:
I literally posted a link to someone else's definition in post #33. I didn't make it up.

What additional definitions does the Oxford give me? Oh look, definition number 1.2. "A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members."

Merriam-Webster gives me "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious". The Macquarie says "a religious or pseudo-religious movement, characterised by the extreme devotion of its members, who usually form a relatively small, tightly controlled group under an authoritarian and charismatic leader" and specifically flags it as derogatory. From the Collins I see "a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents" so don't you go using argumentum ad dictionarium at me. My dictionary-fu is better than yours.

The word "cult" carries a lot more emotional baggage than a single simplistic dictionary definition will suggest. Common usage is that when used to describe a religious or quasi-religious organisation it suggests that the group is sinister and there are shady dealings going on. It suggests sexual exploitation. It suggests Jim Jones, Branch Davidians and Heaven's Gate. Using the word to describe all religion is inaccurate and contrary to common English usage.
But I suspect you're just using it as a way to be deliberately insulting, so I guess that's par for the course.
Click to expand...

I would agree with the highlighted. However, I'd say that those that believe in The Rapture are often in cult-like groups. Not one cult but many related cults.


Merriam-Webster gives me "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious". The Macquarie says "a religious or pseudo-religious movement, characterised by the extreme devotion of its members, who usually form a relatively small, tightly controlled group under an authoritarian and charismatic leader" and specifically flags it as derogatory. From the Collins I see "a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents" so don't you go using argumentum ad dictionarium at me. My dictionary-fu is better than yours.
Click to expand...

The first two dictionaries quoted there give definitions that fit well with churches that believe in The Rapture. One might argue that the Collins definition doesn't completely fit, but again often it would.

If we go back to an earlier post on this by you:

arthwollipot said:
The "rapture" is not a cult at all. It's not an organisation of any kind, loose or otherwise.

The "rapture" is the event where believers are bodily taken in to Heaven. Various churches believe in it to varying degrees, mostly on the evangelical side. If you wanted to reeeeeealy stretch the definition of "cult", you could say that some of these churches may be described as cults, but you cannot - you absolutely cannot - say that the rapture itself is a cult, any more than you can say that a car crash is a school.
Click to expand...

​

Given that saying "The Rapture is a cult" rather than "Churches that believe in the Rapture are cults" seems a reasonable shorthand to me, going by at least two of your own dictionary definitions, and arguably all three in many cases. You can't say that just because there is a common usage that specifically refers to something like Scientology, that other similar common usage as testified by the dictionaries is incorrect.
 
jimbob said:
I would agree with the highlighted. However, I'd say that those that believe in The Rapture are often in cult-like groups. Not one cult but many related cults...

The first two dictionaries quoted there give definitions that fit well with churches that believe in The Rapture. One might argue that the Collins definition doesn't completely fit, but again often it would.
Click to expand...
I think that can be reasonably argued.

jimbob said:
Given that saying "The Rapture is a cult" rather than "Churches that believe in the Rapture are cults" seems a reasonable shorthand to me, going by at least two of your own dictionary definitions, and arguably all three in many cases. You can't say that just because there is a common usage that specifically refers to something like Scientology, that other similar common usage as testified by the dictionaries is incorrect.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think it's a reasonable shorthand, because it confuses an event with an organisation that believes in that event. It's like referring to Christians as "the resurrection". It makes no sense.

Also, whether Scientology is a cult or not is a matter up for considerable question, and I believe that there are good arguments on both sides. When I think of a cult I think more of the ones I mentioned - Peoples' Temple, Branch Davidian, Heaven's Gate. Personally, I don't usually use the word "cult" to refer to any religious organisation that doesn't pose an ongoing risk to the physical and mental health of its members.
 
See https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/how-trump-could-win-2020/592354/

Basically, the evangelical as a proportion of the population has gone down drastically even as their representation in the set of voters has stayed the same (and even increased initially).


48277381777_dc9136e075_o.png


P.S. I grabbed the graphic from a NYTimes article that references the Atlantic article because it's prettier than the bar graph that they use.
 
arthwollipot said:
I literally posted a link to someone else's definition in post #33. I didn't make it up.

What additional definitions does the Oxford give me? Oh look, definition number 1.2. "A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members."

Merriam-Webster gives me "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious". The Macquarie says "a religious or pseudo-religious movement, characterised by the extreme devotion of its members, who usually form a relatively small, tightly controlled group under an authoritarian and charismatic leader" and specifically flags it as derogatory. From the Collins I see "a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents" so don't you go using argumentum ad dictionarium at me. My dictionary-fu is better than yours.

The word "cult" carries a lot more emotional baggage than a single simplistic dictionary definition will suggest. Common usage is that when used to describe a religious or quasi-religious organisation it suggests that the group is sinister and there are shady dealings going on. It suggests sexual exploitation. It suggests Jim Jones, Branch Davidians and Heaven's Gate. Using the word to describe all religion is inaccurate and contrary to common English usage.

But I suspect you're just using it as a way to be deliberately insulting, so I guess that's par for the course.
Click to expand...
Your given definition above fits the RCC.

Yes some cults are not religious cults and some religious cults will gain social respectability and will usually come to be described as a religion rather than a cult.

But it makes not one iota of a difference to the topic of this thread.
 
Darat said:
Your given definition above fits the RCC.
Click to expand...
This might help you to tell the difference. It's from the same site that I posted the definition (not the dictionary ones).

How To Tell A Cult From A Religion?

Darat said:
Yes some cults are not religious cults and some religious cults will gain social respectability and will usually come to be described as a religion rather than a cult.

But it makes not one iota of a difference to the topic of this thread.
Click to expand...
I think it's important to use words according to their commonly-understood meanings, that's all.
 
cosmicaug said:
See https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/how-trump-could-win-2020/592354/

Basically, the evangelical as a proportion of the population has gone down drastically even as their representation in the set of voters has stayed the same (and even increased initially).


[qimg]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48277381777_dc9136e075_o.png[/qimg]

P.S. I grabbed the graphic from a NYTimes article that references the Atlantic article because it's prettier than the bar graph that they use.
Click to expand...

There may be issues with this as discussed on the Twitter thread at https://twitter.com/rp_griffin/status/1150216684738949120
 
arthwollipot said:
This might help you to tell the difference. It's from the same site that I posted the definition (not the dictionary ones).

How To Tell A Cult From A Religion?

I think it's important to use words according to their commonly-understood meanings, that's all.
Click to expand...
As I said your link would mean one should use the word "cult" for the RCC, it would seem your pedantic approach would result in the, to your opinion the wrong word being used to describe the RCC.
 
We had an entire discussion already dedicated to the hairsplit between a religion and a cult and I'll repeat what I said there.

Sometimes with words the "negative connotation" is... kinda the point.

A "Cult" is an insulting term applied to (usually) smaller, (usually) more insular, belief systems (usually) centered around a central charismatic figure and that (usually) require their followers to break away from normal society more than is generally deemed necessary.

So yeah at the end of the day "A cult is just a religion you don't like." Yeah, well duh? The point?

It's like saying "A jerk is just a person you don't like! I demand you define the exact point one becomes the other!"

We have words like this all over the language, words where the definition is literally "I use this term to denote that I perceive the thing negatively" but for some reason people act like it's some confusing concept in some cases because the negative connotations aren't being defined in the same breath.
 
I thought that the traditional usage of "cult" implied secrecy on part of the members; neither the belief system, practices, nor membership would be publicly known. Modernity tends to disapprove of secretive religions so there's usually a negative connotation to using "cult". "Sect" is less negative than "cult", but still connotes being not respectable.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
So no one's pushing for the Jews to get all of Israel and whatever else the circumstances are that they need to speed the Rapture up?

Just a distant belief?

Somewhere we are talking past each other.
Click to expand...

No, the point is that "the rapture" is an event that evangelicals believe in. If anything's a cult, it's evangelical Christianity. The rapture itself can't be a cult anymore than the resurrection of Jesus is a cult.
 
Darat said:
As I said your link would mean one should use the word "cult" for the RCC, it would seem your pedantic approach would result in the, to your opinion the wrong word being used to describe the RCC.
Click to expand...
Not according to any of the links I've provided except some of the dictionary definitions.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I thought that the traditional usage of "cult" implied secrecy on part of the members; neither the belief system, practices, nor membership would be publicly known. Modernity tends to disapprove of secretive religions so there's usually a negative connotation to using "cult". "Sect" is less negative than "cult", but still connotes being not respectable.
Click to expand...
That is indeed one of the hallmarks of a cult, according to the links I have provided. There are others. Veneration of a charismatic leader whose word cannot be questioned without risk of punishment. The separation of cult members from friends and family who are not part of the cult and are therefore viewed as enemies of the cult.

The Roman Catholic Church does not hit very many of these red flags, but Scientology certainly does, especially the Sea Org.
 
arthwollipot said:
That is indeed one of the hallmarks of a cult, according to the links I have provided. There are others. Veneration of a charismatic leader whose word cannot be questioned without risk of punishment. The separation of cult members from friends and family who are not part of the cult and are therefore viewed as enemies of the cult.
Click to expand...

I disagree on the necessity for leaders and familial separation as being integral to the definition of a cult. That may be common in modern cults, but the cults of antiquity like Mithraism, Serapis, the Eleusinian mysteries, and the other "mystery cults" of the Roman empire (of which early Christianity was one until it got imperial favor) didn't have those things. They were more like Masons (which one could certainly consider a cult as well) in that people belonged to private organizations that had secret rituals that they did in their free time, but didn't interfere with their ordinary lives of work and family. And except for certain rituals that would upset animal rights activists these cults were harmless.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I disagree on the necessity for leaders and familial separation as being integral to the definition of a cult. That may be common in modern cults, but the cults of antiquity like Mithraism, Serapis, the Eleusinian mysteries, and the other "mystery cults" of the Roman empire (of which early Christianity was one until it got imperial favor) didn't have those things. They were more like Masons (which one could certainly consider a cult as well) in that people belonged to private organizations that had secret rituals that they did in their free time, but didn't interfere with their ordinary lives of work and family. And except for certain rituals that would upset animal rights activists these cults were harmless.
Click to expand...
I thought it needless to say that I was using a modern definition for modern times.
 
Given the ability to recruit and convert people to a cult via the internet alone, I think some definitions aren't as modern as they should be.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Given the ability to recruit and convert people to a cult via the internet alone, I think some definitions aren't as modern as they should be.
Click to expand...
The word does imply a meatspace organisation, rather than a purely web presence. I don't know if the idea of online cults has been studied as much as meatspace ones. I might need to do a little more research.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I thought that the traditional usage of "cult" implied secrecy on part of the members; neither the belief system, practices, nor membership would be publicly known. Modernity tends to disapprove of secretive religions so there's usually a negative connotation to using "cult". "Sect" is less negative than "cult", but still connotes being not respectable.
Click to expand...

A common usage but due to many people conflating “cult” and “occult” which are totally different words with different origins funny enough. Occult meaning hidden, and cult having the same etymology as culture.
 
dann said:
A Danish perspective: Born Again Christians: Trump is chosen by God (DR.dk, Nov. 17, 2019)
Includes a short (84 sec.) horror video from the land of the unenlightened.
Click to expand...

From the Google Translated version:
For every President of the United States in recent times, there was a corresponding king on the throne of Israel in biblical times:

- Bill Clinton was on the national scene for 22 years. King Ahab was on the national scene for 22 years in ancient Israel. Barack Obama was on the national scene from 2004 to 2016, for 12 years. King Jorah was the leader for 12 years. And Jorah is followed by a warrior figure: a man named Jehu, who is not a politician but who is wild and unpredictable, says Pastor Cahn.

- Trump in many ways follows exactly the same pattern that King Jehu did: He entered into an alliance with the religious conservatives, as did Trump. Jehu promised to drain the political swamp, as did Trump.
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought Trump was supposed to be a modern King Darius? What gives?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom