What is the most dangerous religious cult out there today?

Probably one we don’t know about yet.

Scientologists.

Or Fundamentalist Christians.

I’m tempted to say Scientology, but @The_Compassionate_Heretic could just as well be right.

Probably the C Street Family. They have been in business for 80 years and they cultivate members of Congress for higher office. They have a theology that says that the way Christianity has been interpreted for the past 2000 years is wrong. All this stuff about the meek shall inherit the earth is meant to placate the masses. What they maintain is that Jesus really intended was for the rich and the powerful to become even more rich and powerful, and to rule with biblical authority over the masses. They cite Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot as examples of the sort of people Jesus would favor.

The cult members are expected to swear an oath of loyalty to the family (which they describe as a Christian Mafia) to put the family ahead of everything else in their lives, including their spouses. Sounds like fascism to me.

Thanks @MontyZuma for reminding me to add The Family by Jeff Sharlet to my TBR list.

I kind of agree with @drdoombot that Fundamentalist Christians have become a dangerous cult in our society. The danger comes from the sheer number and the lack of independent thought that many members seem to have given up as being “unfaithful” and “not believing enough.”

Fundamentalist anything.

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is seriously messed up.

Scientology is on par with them or even worse maybe.

Sad to say, I was in Scientology from 1967 to 1971, before the Internet and others had exposed what a crock it was. I met L. Ron Hubbard and I can tell you he was a fat blustery, impulsive blowhard that talked just to hear himself talk. If you ever want to see a religion that was designed in the image and likeness of a psychopath, check out Scientology.

I think they’re all pretty scary in the power they influence over believers. When a guy has evil intentions and charisma as well, people follow the Pied Piper wherever he goes!

greed

If one equates ”..most dangerous..” with a cult’s ability to do the most damage to the most people, then I would suggest the heavily armed cults of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and whatever is the predominant religion/cult that motivates China. A cult is a cult irrespective of how few or how many people follow it.

The “dangerous” cult of ‘Nationalism’ is worthy of mention. As is the divisive, short-termist, environmentally and socially destructive “cult” of Capitalism. Which in turn is powered and maintained by the “cult” of Party Politics.

All “dangerous” and being used to steer the ‘Ship that is Humanity’ towards the rocks.

Please, please please don’t use the word cult. It is the same thing as saying religion, but just has a negative connotation. Besides the definition, the traits and characteristics are the same.

Not going to lie, the first thing that came to my mind is the Fellowship of the Sun. (Don’t worry, its fake, but anyone who has read the Sookie Stackhouse series or seen True Blood would know what I’m talking about.)

The Fellowship of the Sun then reminded me of the Westboro Baptist Church members. Besides pissing people off, I don’t think they have done anything bad, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they have plans in place to defend themselves should they need it. They make me super mad.

The 9/11 attacks were motivated by religion, right? So I’d have to say those extremists would be the most dangerous.

Some Christians scare me though. It think its made worse by how widely accepted Christianity is in America.

I don’t care if people want something to believe in, but I don’t like the idea of religion because of how close-minded it can make people. Christianity is probably the weirdest in this sense because many people make it bend to accommodate their own views. Ahhh never mind, this is irrelevant to your question.

I would have to say Scientology as well. In 1983 I used to walk past the Fort Harrison Hotel daily on my way to work. There was a room on the top floor which had the lights on 24/7. It was rumoured back then that they kept people awake around the clock while they were being “programmed”. It was really creepy seeing them in the streets trying to recruit people in their uniforms. They own most of that area of Clearwater now. I remember seeing help wanted signs on all of their buildings. I guess that was a way to try and get people inside.

Lisa Lisa’s Jam Cult is not to be trusted.

I’m also very leery of The Cult and Culture Club.

These folks are a bunch of extremists, and some of their belief systems are VERY SCARY.

So I would have to say the extreme sects of Christianity like the one mentioned above and these guys of Islamic belief.

The least dangerous of religious beliefs would be Bahai and Evelynism. Neither of these two seem prone to violent outbursts and murder in the name of the deity. There are probably a few more, like Scientific Pantheism, the FSM, and the IPU.

Scientology Is the biggest cult ain’t even a religion !

More of a political cult made up of the religious fundamentalist but I’d have to say the Fellowship, aka the Family. As @MontyZuma mentioned earlier, the often refer to themselves as the Christian Mafia.

<——-is willing to bet @Blondesjon sings Do You Really Want to Hurt Me by Culture Club in the shower.—

@evelyns_pet_zebra . . .I actually sing Wake Me Up Before You Go Go by Wham while I’m in the shower.

I sing Do You Really Want TO Hurt Me when @jonsblond and I are getting ready to…uh…snuggle.

@Blondesjon That isn’t what you told AstroChuck about sleeping.

I would have to go with Islam or Scientology. Dangerous towards who, though?

The cult of self.

@MontyZuma, I am posting a new question here for people with stories like yours.

@MontyZuma I agree with you on the Scientology. I went to the Scientology Church in San Diego because someone I was dating wanted to get to know about the religion. We went to their Sunday “service” and all it was, was a tape of L. Ron talking about himself. According to my now ex, I sat there with a “pissy” look on my face. No doubt.

@evelyns_pet_zebra Very scary indeed! Here is their doctrine

I’m surprised nobody’s said al-Qaeda.

Seriously. Al-Qaeda. They are a pervasive influence in the Muslim world, and actually kill lots of people.

@Qingu I did, I said Islam – and Al Qaeda follows it

The First Church of Shatnerology.

@AstroChuck oh man, that is the weirdest religion I have seen yet. Listening to William Shatner sing is like having your fingernails removed by rabid badgers under a waterfall of camel phlegm as you drown in a swimming pool of leeches.

Catholicism, have we forgotten the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and of course the turning of their backs during the holocaust.

- Islamic Wahhabism
– Taliban Sunni Islamism
– Scientology
– Jehovah’s Witnesses
– Opus Dei
– Ultraorthodox Judaism
– Young Earth Creationism

Mattbrowne, I never heard of half of those, no very little of some of the others, but how can you say that Jehovah’s Witnesses are dangerous? I read several places on AB and fluther how people slam doors on, squirt water on, sick dogs on, pull guns on, spit on and many other things to them at their doors. They do not retaliate, as they are well aware of the counsel at Romans chapter 12. Try doing that to someone that truly is dangerous. I looked at your profile and see that you live in Germany. You of all people should be well aware of the fact that all they had to do was renounce their faith and participate in the slaughter of other innocents such as Jews, handi capped, Gypsy’s and other “undesirables” like most of the Churches did to save their own skin. I don’t see how you can say that someone that would rather die than kill you is dangerous.
http://www.answerbag.co.uk/a_view/3146930

I have no respect for any religion or any member of a religion that has to sell itself door to door.

It’s pretty pathetic. I just let the dogs bark at them and wave them away.

Well I’m sorry to say but this question can not be answered without one showing predjudice!! How can we give a definate answer here?
There is no actual “worst dangerous cult” there may be dangerous people within that cult or religion as there are good and bad people everywhere!!
But as far as naming the most dangerous, I don’t think that can be answered!!

Fair enough rooeytoo, not everyone has respect for the Bible, I have not always myself. I appreciate the second part of your response though. Thats better than some treat them.
(Acts 5:42) And every day in the temple and from house to house they continued without letup teaching and declaring the good news about the Christ, Jesus.
(Acts 20:20) while I did not hold back from telling YOU any of the things that were profitable nor from teaching YOU publicly and from house to house.
. Nice answer Dabria, it seems subjective at best.

@texasescimo – I’m a liberal Christian with a strong focus on the Age of Enlightenment and interfaith dialog. Resisting the Nazis was a very honorable and brave thing to do and in that respect the Jehovah’s Witnesses did the right thing. However being right about one thing doesn’t automatically mean being right about everything. Overall I consider the Jehovah’s Witnesses a (mildly) dangerous religious organization. They are not as extreme as the followers of Islamic Wahhabism, Taliban Sunni Islamism or the followers of the Scientology cult.

There are several qualities of the Jehovah’s Witnesses system which I consider to be part of Christian fundamentalism. For a more detailed classification, see

http://www.fluther.com/disc/61293/aggressive-atheism-promotes-religious-fundamentalism-what-are-the-pros-and/

At least in Germany the Jehovah’s Witnesses reject secular society and see a theocracy as being superior over democracy. They don’t participate in elections. They reject science including evolutionary biology. They discriminate against homosexuals. Only cheating is a reason for divorce, but not domestic violence. Their missionary zeal is very irritating. The list is very long.

Mattbrowne, I am not sure what a liberal Christian is so I cannot speak for what liberals believe, but I do know what the Bible says. I do appreciate your softened tone, but let me remind you that it is better to find out from the source what they believe rather than prejudiced sources.

We do not reject secular society, but yes, we do consider theocracy as being over democracy or any other kind of government. We do not protest or fight against any governments as we are in subjection to them and pay our taxes and such. However, when the governments contradict what God’s word says, we must obey God as ruler rather than man. As far as elections, our vote is for Jesus Christ our King and redeemer.

We do not reject proven science, however we do reject evolution. We believe that God created everything through Jesus. When I see my wife and kids, I see the work of a loving God.

We do not discriminate against homosexuals. Some Christians used to be homosexuals but we show everyone that will listen what God’s standards are rather than mislead them and than tell them what they want to hear in order to gain more converts.

We do not teach that cheating is the only grounds for divorce. God’s word shows that fornication is the only grounds for divorce with a view to marrying another.

We do take the work that Jesus gave us seriously. If the preaching work bothers you, as the scriptures show that most don’t like it, you might take the counsel that Gamaliel gave. (Acts 5:33–42)

Sorry for all of the scriptures as I know that not everyone believes in the Bible. I posted them because you said that you are some type of Christian and due to that, I think that they might not bother you. I hope that this will help you have a better understanding of what JW’s believe and why they believe it.

(Acts 28:22) But we think it proper to hear from you what your thoughts are, for truly as regards this sect it is known to us that everywhere it is spoken against.”
(Romans 13:1) Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God.
(Romans 13:7) Render to all their dues, to him who [calls for] the tax, the tax; to him who [calls for] the tribute, the tribute; to him who [calls for] fear, such fear; to him who [calls for] honor, such honor.
(Acts 5:29) In answer Peter and the [other] apostles said: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.
(Luke 20:25) He said to them: “By all means, then, pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.”
(Genesis 1:25) And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good.
(Romans 1:20) For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable;
(Hebrews 3:4) Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God.
(2 Timothy 4:3–4) For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories.
(1 Corinthians 6:9–11) What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.
(Matthew 19:9) I say to YOU that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery.”
(2 Corinthians 2:15–16) For to God we are a sweet odor of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; 16 to the latter ones an odor issuing from death to death, to the former ones an odor issuing from life to life. And who is adequately qualified for these things?
(2 Timothy 4:2,5) 2 preach the word, be at it urgently in favorable season, in troublesome season, reprove, reprimand, exhort, with all long-suffering and [art of] teaching. 5 You, though, keep your senses in all things, suffer evil, do [the] work of an evangelizer, fully accomplish your ministry.
(Matthew 28:19–20) Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded YOU. And, look! I am with YOU all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.”
(Romans 10:15) How, in turn, will they preach unless they have been sent forth? Just as it is written: “How comely are the feet of those who declare good news of good things!”
(Matthew 24:14) And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.

Just quit leaving copies of Watchtower on my front porch and we’re good.

@AstroChuck . . . They just leave them there?!? I’ve been payin’ a buck a pop.”

There’s a reason that I put a sign on my door of my apartment… No religious propaganda. :P

@texasescimo – Well, you and I we are both Christians, but otherwise our value systems seem to be quite different. You favor theocracy. Well, here’s the problem. A theocracy will force you and all your other Jehovah’s Witnesses to shut up, and if you don’t, send you to prison. You benefit from secular society which gives you freedom of religion. You think there’s only one truth, yet secular society favors pluralism. Try showing copies of the Watchtower in the streets of Riyadh or Tehran and you will get a feeling what theocracy is all about. Get a feeling what it means when people “obey” God. When people think there’s only one truth.

The Nazis only had one truth and we all know what happened. Ideological fanaticism and this includes religious fanaticism leads to disaster. We need the opposite. To me freedom of religion including the right not to believe is far more important than my own religion. I prefer to live in a country with a lot of tolerant atheists than a country of Jehovah’s Witnesses who “obey” their God solely based on their interpretation of the Bible.

No one can claim monopolies of truths. This is one of the reasons that led to the Age of Enlightenment. Sorry to say this, but the Jehovah’s Witnesses are still stuck in the 12th century. And this is the reason I consider them (mildly) dangerous. I would welcome if you contribute to reforming your movement. Change is hard, but it can be done.

Quote: “A theocracy will force you and all your other Jehovah’s Witnesses to shut up, and if you don’t, send you to prison”. It is secular governments that force us into prison and concentration camps when we adhere to what God says when man contradicts it. Hitler would have done well to have followed the teachings of the Bible rather than his on idealogies.

Shouldn’t all Christians base their values on the Christians Creek Scriptures? Theocracy just means God rule, shouldn’t all Christians follow the example of the Christians in the first century as brought out in Acts 5:29 in the inspired word? I think that we benefit from God who lets existing authorities stand place in their relative positions. As mentioned in my other post, we support and pay taxes to whatever government we are under, but we also recognize limits as to what the governments can make us do. You yourself appear to agree that following Hitler was wrong, at least from your writings. Of course for many, it is another story when their life is on the line.

Quote: “The Nazis only had one truth and we all know what happened. Ideological fanaticism and this includes religious fanaticism leads to disaster.” I find it ironic that you would compare that to JW’s. Hitler could not have done the atrocities he did without the support of the Churches in Germany. You living in Germany should no about the purple triangles.

I actually have found many Athiest to be more reasonable than alot of religious people.
Some religions seem to be stuck in the 4th century trying to hold to creeds and doctrines formulated by Church Fathers, some try to hold to reformers of the 15th and 16th centuries, we go back to the first century Bible for our teachings, how do you consider us to be of the 12th century?

@texasescimo- There was no “first century Bible.”

@AstroChuck nice job at picking at a straw. you know what he meant.

Thank you for your reasonableness eponymoushipster, but don’t make yourself a target on my behalf. AstroChuck, although all of the books were not put together in a bound volume like we have today, the letters which make up the Christian Greek Scriptures of the Bible were written in the first century and as most would realize, those first century writings are what I was referring to.

Oh my God! I’m a target!

AstroChuck, you have to admit that your nitpicking of [There was no “first century Bible.”} along with your sarcastic “Oh my God! I’m a target!” were driven by bigotry.

Bigotry? How in the hell do you come to a ridiculous conclusion as that?

I don’t see you nitpicking anyone else nor being sarcastic towards anyone else. If I am reading it wrong, please except my apology and help me to understand your comments.

@texasescimo Out of line.

Do you see anything in this thread directed towards me or my religion that you would consider out of line?

big⋅ot⋅ry  /ˈbɪgətri/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [big-uh-tree] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ries. 1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.
2. the actions, beliefs, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.
————————————————————————————————————————

Origin:
1665–75; bigot + -ry, formation parallel to F bigoterie

Synonyms:
1. narrow-mindedness, bias, discrimination.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigotry

Like I said to Astro previously, if I am reading it wrong, please except my apology. I percieve bias in some of the responses, if my perceptions are wrong, as they may be, then I am sorry.

@texasescimo No. A reality check, yes. Out of line? No. Not like calling someone a bigot because they dare to disagree with you.

Just a tip. If you want people to respect your beliefs, its better to respect theirs. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs and should have the right to not be told that they’re wrong because they don’t believe the same thing as someone else.

Reality check indeed. I suspect that 99% of the people on this thread disagree with me. The only time that I used the term bigotry is when nitpicking and sarcasm were used in response to my answers.

If you think it is okay to say someones religion is a dangerous cult when it is not, you compare ones religion to being similar to Hitler who tried to wipe them for not supporting him in his slaughter of innocents and you do not consider that out of line, then I guess that you and me will have to disagree.

@texasescimo- I still fail to understand the bigotry remark. WTF did I say that brought that on? I simply pointed out the fact that the Bible (that is, the Christian Bible) didn’t exist in the first century. All of a sudden I receive, “Dont make yourself a target…” and I responded sarcastically, as anyone who has been on Fluther will tell you I do all the time. Do I think you were out of line? HELL YES!

@texasescimo People do that to others, and to me, EVERY DAY. Are you seriously going to sit here and say that you’re the ONLY ONE who has to deal with people telling you that your religion is wrong? Seriously? No, seriously?

Try being raised Catholic in a predominately Baptist area and then tell me that I don’t know what its like to have your religion denigrated.

You, @texasescimo, are a hypocrite. Look that one up.

People have differing opinions. People disagree. But calling people “bigots” when they dare to disagree with you is out of line.

Make sure that I understand this right.
To say that answers full of sarcasm and nitpicking are driven by bigotry and then apologizing if I am reading them wrong is wrong.
To say ones religion is a dangerous cult is acceptable.
To say one is a hypocrite is acceptable.
To twist what one says and the context of it being said is acceptable: I said his answers were driven by bigotry, you are saying that I am saying he is a bigot and you are saying that I said that because he disagrees with me.
Did I get it right?

PS, your analogy of being persecuted by Baptist pales in comparison to what many have undergone in concentration camps. Persecution in any form is wrong, sorry to hear that you have experienced that from Baptist. I assume they did more than say that something that you said was driven by bigotry, how did you get out of the persecution or is it still happenning?

@texasescimo It does. But its religious persecution nonetheless. Its not unique to those in concentration camps or to your particular sect. There are many, many people who have been persecuted for their religions in various ways including having their religion called a cult. You are not alone.

Look up the meaning of hypocrite. Then maybe you’ll see what I’m talking about. Being of the opinion that you can say whatever about religion but no one else can is hypocritical.

“Driven by bigotry” and “being a bigot” are the same thing. And the only reason you’re posting that is because he found a factual error and disagreed with you.

Calling someone a bigot because they found a factual error in your posts is out of line. Saying that people are not entitled to their own opinions while expressing yours and expecting people to respect them is hypocrisy. If you are being a hypocrite, it is not out of line to call you one. If someone is not being a bigot (“driven by bigotry,” whatever), calling them one is out of line.

Btw, I never said anyone’s religion was wrong, let alone dangerous. Nor did I ridicule anybody’s faith.

@AstroChuck . . . I knew that was a racist haircut!

Nope, you did not. I was talking to avvooooooo in relation to his seeming to be appalled at my comments over all the comments made in this thread. If you notcie, someone said that we discriminate against homosexuals. In my reply, I showed that was a misconception and did not feel the need to cuss at him. My comments are the most offensive in this thread. So for a third time, I apologize for thinking you were nitpicking or being sarcastic if indeed you were not.

@texasescimo I am not a “he.”

Sorry maam.

So we’re all good here?

I hope so. I hope all of my apologies were not just cast into the wind.
(James 3:2) For we all stumble many times. If anyone does not stumble in word, this one is a perfect man, able to bridle also [his] whole body.
(Ephesians 4:32) But become kind to one another, tenderly compassionate, freely forgiving one another just as God also by Christ freely forgave YOU.
(Matthew 6:14) “For if YOU forgive men their trespasses, YOUR heavenly Father will also forgive YOU;

If anyone is interested in deep study, here are some online Bibles, Concordances, and Manuscripts:

http://bible.cc/psalms/83-18.htm /. Several translation, only one verse at a time.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1John5:7-8;&version=31;77;50;51;49; /. 5 versions with up to 5 groups of verses
http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/tyndale/ /. William Tyndales Bible
http://www.watchtower.org/e/bh/article_00.htm Many articles with links to scriptures.
http://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh1.pdf Online interlinear.
http://www.thebiblereference.com/ /. King James and American Standard with Strongs references
http://www2.mf.no/bibelprog/vines /. Vines concordance
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm Many versions, concordance’s, manuscripts (including the “Textus Receptus” and the “Alexandrian”.
http://www.eliyah.com/lxx.html Fragments of the Greek Septuagint
http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx Query&book=36&chapter= 1&lid=en&side=r&ve rse=18&zoomSlider=0#36–1-1 8–5 Sinaitic manuscript, I believe that it is the oldest complete manuscript.
Here are some differences that I have noticed. http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/7025764

The following have something to do with the Vatican MS 1209 from the 4th century, but as of right now, I don’t see an English parallel. [http://www.csntm.org/Manuscript/View/GA_03
http://www.biblefacts.org/church/pdf/Codex%20Vaticanus.pdf
Further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04086a.htm /./ http://betterbibles.com/2008/07/24/in-the-news-worlds-oldest-bible-goes-online/]

At least we didn’t kill a tree printing out and distributing more unsolicited propaganda to toss into the rubbish

@texasescimo – You said, theocracy just means God’s rule. Which rule exactly? The mullahs in Iran claim to follow God’s rule. So do the religious leaders in Saudi Arabia. Christian fundamentalists think that their interpretation of God’s rule is the true truth and that of other faiths is false truth. And vice versa of course. Therefore theocracies are prisons for everyone who disagrees. I favor the secular system and the principle is: people rule (via their elected representatives). Modern democracies grant religious people freedom of religion and atheists the freedom to not believe.

I appreciate tolerant atheists, I appreciate tolerant Muslims, I appreciate tolerant Jews, I appreciate tolerant Hindus, I appreciate tolerant Buddhists, I appreciate tolerant Christians which also means I appreciate tolerant Jehovah’s Witnesses. So far I haven’t met a tolerant Jehovah’s Witness capable of appreciating tolerant non-believers and believers of different faiths. Maybe you’re the first. I also appreciate homosexuals, although I’m a heterosexual. I don’t want them to change. I appreciate them the way they are. Do you? Earlier you said that some Christians you know used to be homosexuals but we (Jehovah’s Witnesses) show everyone that will listen what God’s standards are.

What you mean isn’t God’s standards, but Jehovah’s Witnesses standards which you declare to be a universal truth. But to me the truth is there is no universal truth. I think that dogmas arise in a social context and when the context changes, dogmas should change too or even be given up. Rituals can be seen as a means to strengthen social groups. Christianity must not claim exclusive rights in defining truth and it is best seen as one world view among many. In-group/out-group morality models should be given up.

you’ve got to wonder if @mattbrowne yells out his own name during sex

Quote: ” I also appreciate homosexuals, although I’m a heterosexual. I don’t want them to change. I appreciate them the way they are.”
Does the following scripture mean anything to you?
(1 Corinthians 6:9–11) What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

Most Christians believe that the Apostle Paul wrote that under divine inspiration. I am really not sure which Christians do not accept the Bible as their moral compass. Have you read the Bible? All of my post with scriptures further up in this thread were posted as I thought that you as a Christian, believed in the Bible. I have had conversations with Athiest, Moslems, and other religions before. With them, I usually approach things a little different as they obviously would not have the same respect for the Bible as I do. What do you base your religious beliefs on?

I know that the Bible says that some would accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled, but I don’t think the scriptures put that in a good light. I also don’t think that Christians would have been warned about persecution so many times in the scriptures if Christians were just suppossed to tell everyone that what they are doing is acceptable to God. I imagine that everyone but God would want to be my friend and love me if I said that the Bible teaches that cheating on your wife is okay, having more than one wife is acceptible to Christ, premarital sex is acceptible, stealing is acceptable, and so on. As it is, I cannot say that the Bible says that. I was not raised in a religious household. As an adult, I had to humble myself and make many changes to conform to the Bibles standards. I of course still struggle as we all do.
(2 Timothy 4:3–4) For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories.
(2Tim 3:12–13) In fact, all those desiring to live with godly devotion in association with Christ Jesus will also be persecuted. 13 But wicked men and impostors will advance from bad to worse, misleading and being misled
(James 4:4) Adulteresses, do YOU not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God

@texasescimo- I think @mattbrowne might be more concerned with Matthew 7.

Is there a difference between Judging and Witnessing? I think there is. I don’t consider saying what the Bible really says is the same as judging. If I had judged someone, I would not knock on their door. I have a relative that I love very much that is gay. I am not judging him but I will not lie to him about what the Bible really says either. The scriptures warn us several times about being misled. I don’t consider Paul to be judging, I don’t consider Ezekiel or the other prophets to be judging, nor do I consider telling others what the scriptures really say to be judging. Maybe I am wrong, each one can decide for himself.

I see a stark contrast between what mattbrowne said and what Paul said. Others might not see it that way. I do not judge them as I do not know their heart nor their motives. God has given all judging to Jesus but we are still to do what he said and tell it like it is.
(Galatians 6:1) Brothers, even though a man takes some false step before he is aware of it, YOU who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness, as you each keep an eye on yourself, for fear you also may be tempted.
(Galatians 6:7) Do not be misled: God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a man is sowing, this he will also reap;

(John 5:22) For the Father judges no one at all, but he has committed all the judging to the Son,
(Isaiah 11:1–4) And there must go forth a twig out of the stump of Jes′se; and out of his roots a sprout will be fruitful. 2 And upon him the spirit of Jehovah must settle down, the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and of mightiness, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah; 3 and there will be enjoyment by him in the fear of Jehovah. And he will not judge by any mere appearance to his eyes, nor reprove simply according to the thing heard by his ears. 4 And with righteousness he must judge the lowly ones, and with uprightness he must give reproof in behalf of the meek ones of the earth. And he must strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; and with the spirit of his lips he will put the wicked one to death.

(1 Corinthians 6:9–11) What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.

Ezekiel 3:17–21 “Son of man, a watchman is what I have made you to the house of Israel, and you must hear from my mouth speech and you must warn them from me. 18 When I say to someone wicked, ‘You will positively die,’ and you do not actually warn him and speak in order to warn the wicked one from his wicked way to preserve him alive, he being wicked, in his error he will die, but his blood I shall ask back from your own hand. 19 But as for you, in case you have warned someone wicked and he does not actually turn back from his wickedness and from his wicked way, he himself for his error will die; but as for you, you will have delivered your own soul. 20 And when someone righteous turns back from his righteousness and actually does injustice and I must put a stumbling block before him, he himself will die because you did not warn him. For his sin he will die, and his righteous acts that he did will not be remembered, but his blood I shall ask back from your own hand. 21 And as for you, in case you have warned someone righteous that the righteous one should not sin, and he himself does not actually sin, he will without fail keep on living because he had been warned, and you yourself will have delivered your own soul.

@texasescimo . . . NO DRUNKARDS!?!

You sir, have crossed the line.

@Blondesjon- Its always got to be about you, doesn’t it?

(Hezekiah 3:4) Nor humorous internet posters.
Lol. Thanks for lightening things up a bit Blondesjon.

@texasescimo You post “but God says homos are bad” and are calling people a bigot in the same thread? Again… seriously?

@AstroChuck I’ve always been partial to Matthew 6.

Anyone else noticed that this thread has been TOTALLY hijacked?

Avvoooooooo, what do these scriptures say to you?
1Tim 1:10 “the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,”
Romans 1:27 “and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
Lev 18:22 “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.“
1Cor 6:9–11 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Tim1:10;Romans1:27;Lev18:22;1Cor6:9-11&version=ESV;HCSB;NASB;KJV;ASV

Avvooooooo, you seem to have an ax to grind. If you consider me saying that I think someones comments “were driven by bigotry” is the same as calling someone a bigot, why not just quote it the way it was said?
Where is this quote from? “but God says homos are bad” Why not just quote 1Cor 6:9–11 as I did and give your opinion of what you think of Paul? Or maybe even quote me for what I said in context as well as what I was quoting from?
I agree that Matthew 6 is very good as is all of the sermon on the mountain from Matthew 5–7, but I also believe in the rest of the Bible. I am sorry that you have been so badly persecuted by the Baptist in your area, but I am not Baptist.
I apologized to AstroChuck I think 3 times for misunderstanding his comments if they were not meant the way I took them. Although he did not say that I took his comments wrong or that he accepted my apology, at one point he implied that we were all good here. If he is okay with my horrible sin, why do you feel the need to keep rehashen it?

Just curious. What does the Bible say about woman lying with another woman as with a man?

@texasescimo Are you aware that you are hijacking this thread? Which means taking it completely off topic with your posts? The question was about religious cults, not about what scripture you feel like posting. From the first answer where you started dragging scripture in and trying to make it support your points, you have been off topic. That is against the fluther guidelines. If you want to have this conversation, get your own question that actually has to do with what you want to talk about. Continuing in this manner in this thread is inappropriate.

As for your comments toward me, I think its ridiculious that people are all “God is Love… except when it comes to these people.” Either its a God of love or a God of hate and you can’t have it both ways. I choose to believe in the love part and discard the bigoted ideas that even the MEN (fallible and with prejudices) that wrote the Bible choose to try and impose on others.

I think all religions and religious people should mind their own god damned business and what anyone else does in their own bedroom and with whom will not therefore offend you. The god creature can deal with them directly when the time comes, no middle man such as yourselves needed.

As I said above, they are all scary to me!

Sorry, I have to admit that I did not read all of the guidelines. I did not realize that it was okay for one to judge another religion as a dangerous cult but for one to try to defend that charge in the same thread was wrong. Sorry to interupt the witch hunt, continue on. I know that you are partial to Matthew 6, so you might appreciate this:
Matthew 6:14–15 For if YOU forgive men their trespasses, YOUR heavenly Father will also forgive YOU; 15 whereas if YOU do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will YOUR Father forgive YOUR trespasses

i don’t remember all caps in the bible. is that the king kevin version?

@texasescimo You ceased discussing anything having to do with the question and went off on a preaching rant. I suggest reading the guidelines since even after being told repeatedly, you don’t seem to “get” that going “off-topic” is against the rules. Since you don’t want to discuss the topic, I suggest you follow my lead and cease posting on this thread.

@eponymoushipster – In plain English?

@texasescimo – Yes, I’ve read the whole bible. Time does not stand still. We cannot freeze viewpoints because contexts do change. It’s interesting though that there are no written records of Jesus speaking out against homosexuals. While others expressed their disgust about prostitutes or people with contagious diseases he came to their aid. He was the advocate of the poor and powerless.

Almost 2000 years have passed since the New Testament was written. Even more since the Old Testament. Just reading the bible and quoting it is not enough. I recommend you read the following two articles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_criticism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_hermeneutics#Trajectory_hermeneutics

and I quote:

“Trajectory hermeneutics is a liberal teaching in postmodern Christianity that parts of the Bible can have progressive, different meanings as a culture unfolds, advances, and matures. One teaching under this view is that homosexuality was once a sin but has become acceptable due to cultural changes and advances in understanding of psychology and the social sciences. Proponents of trajectory hermeneutics may point to Romans 1:18–32 and explain that Paul has always been speaking to those who violate their sexual orientation, those that go against their natural desire. But a homosexual’s natural desire is for the same sex, which is now defended as natural by some.”

Back to the original question:

In my opinion any form of religion which just sticks to a literal understanding of a holy text while excluding other sources of wisdom and critical thinking has the potential to turn into a dangerous cult.

I have no problem with conservative forms of religions as long as it doesn’t harm other people. Again, I appreciate any tolerant worldview or religion. And I try to avoid judgments as outlined in Matthew 7. But when people get hurt we can’t always avoid judgments.

I cancelled my previous account as I was coming off offensive although I really did not intend to. I thought about it and decided to come back. If I am out of line responding to either legitimate questions or misconceptions, someone can flag my responses and let the moderators know. I have a feeling that if they remove my responses, they might also remove what I was responding to also.
Blondesjon, not all translations give you a way to know when a plural pronoun is added where the context calls for it.
If you notice, there is no “you” or “your” equivalent reflected in the verses in question. To cross the language barrier, most translators insert them to make since in English.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?t=KJV&b=Mat&c=6&v=1&x=42&y=16#conc/14
From the preface: “SECOND PERSON PLURALS: Where “YOU” is printed in small capital letters, it shows that the pronoun is plural. Also, where the plural number of a verb is not apparent, its plurality is indicated by printing it in small capital letters. If the context already clearly indicates plurality, then no special capitalization is used.”
Unfortunately, small caps were enlarged when I copied and pasted, perhaps giving the impression that I was screaming. If that is the way it was taken, I apologize for that.
Mat KJV 5:20
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
The KJV uses “ye” for second person plurals and “you” at other times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_person

Most translation use all caps some of the time. Some tell you in the preface their reason, but some do not tell you. Look at these examples:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=psalms%20110:1;luke%2020:42&version=NASB;KJV;NKJV;NLT;YLT

@texasescim Still off topic. Again, there are guidelines for the site. Read them.

I really think it’s great to have a Jehovah’s Witness with an honest interest to participate in Fluther debates which means sticking to the guidelines and clearly excludes missionary work. We should be a tolerant community so as long as everybody follows the guidelines this includes people whose views we might not share.

I included the Jehovah’s Witnesses in my list of cults, so I think it’s fair to allow @texasescim to put forward arguments why he disagrees. Do the moderators agree with this approach?

My recommendation to him would be to

- abstain from missionary work
– not continue posting bible quote after bible quote
– explain why he thinks the Jehovah’s Witnesses are not a cult
– create his own list of dangerous religious cults (which refers to the original question) which could for example include other religions or sects

Quote from up above: “i don’t remember all caps in the bible. is that the king kevin version?”. Is that on topic or is that okay because that person is not texasescim? If that had been flagged and removed before I responded to that person, I would not have responded.
Wuold you perhaps prefer that I call Catholics a cult on the same basis that mattbrowne considers JW’s a cult and added that some Catholics even went so far as to where amnesty internation had to get involved? Some might make that judgement but I will not as although I disagree with alot of Catholic teachings, I find alot that I meet to be very nice people.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091103.html

I could not find any references about amnesy international getting involved to stop the Baptist persecution of Catholics in the Bible belt though. If I am off topic each time I respond to someone, are you perhaps off topic also each time you respond to me?
Have you tried flagging my responses?

mattbrowne, one persons perspective of what a cult is compared to anothers is apparantly different. Without looking up the definition, what comes to my mind are those that usually follow some person rather than the teachings of the Bible and as far as a dangerous cult, I think of those that use their positions as a way to molest children or even adults that are misled, or perhaps those that planning a group suicide. They usually live in a compound too.

@texasescim Have at it. I don’t agree with their teachings either. Which is why I was raised Catholic but no longer claim it. Baptists persecute everyone, including other Baptists that don’t believe exactly what they do, condemning others to hell on the basis of small points of doctrine.

Some people don’t agree with organized religion as a whole because of the things it does to people who believe and who don’t. They’re all more or less cults.

Talking about religions and religious persecution is on topic. Quoting Bible verses about this, that, and the other thing is not. Preaching is not on topic, nor is attempted conversion. Neither of the last are considered socially acceptable here where we attempt to have conversations, not sermons.

According to Michael Shermer, who is a historian of science and author, a cult is characterized by

1) Veneration, glorification and inerrancy of the former or current leader to the point of virtual sainthood or divinity
2) Acceptance of beliefs and pronouncements on all subjects without applying critical thinking
3) Persuasive techniques from benign to coercive are used to recruit new followers and reinforce current beliefs
4) Hidden agendas exist and the true nature of the group’s beliefs and plans is obscured from or not fully disclosed to potential recruits and the general public
5) There is deceit, therefore recruits and followers are not told everything they should know about the group’s inner circle, and particularly disconcerting flaws or potentially embarrassing events or circumstances are covered up
6) Sometimes there is financial exploitation and recruits and followers are persuaded to invest money and other assets (in very rare cases there’s also sexual exploitation)
7) There is absolute truth which also means that the group has discovered final knowledge on any relevant number of subjects
8) Absolute morality is also being claimed, which means the group’s system of right and wrong thoughts and actions are are applicable to members and non-members alike. Those who strictly follow the moral code become and remain members and those who do not are dismissed or punished

I posted a new Fluther question which also focuses on the various definitions of cults.

http://www.fluther.com/disc/68521/how-do-you-define-a-cult-and-what-are-some-good/

ck out religioustolerance.org it has all world religions their from a-z .