Thread: Whats the difference between a religion and a cult?

religion: large group of people who are led by (an) actual believer(s) who want(s) other believers to believe the same thing

cult: wannabe religion that is led by people who make it all up for money, and the leaders mostly do not believe what they teach

cult: wannabe religion that is led by people who make it all up for money, and the leaders mostly do not believe what they teach[/b]

Hmm...I wish the leaders of the Catholic church believed what they were teaching. Then there would probably be a lot fewer cases of priests molesting young boys and bishops try to cover all of that up.

100 years ago the Mormons were a cult.

Originally posted by pOOp
cult: wannabe religion that is led by people who make it all up for money,

hmmmmmmmmmmm.....i don't know how much you know about the catholic church....and how much money they actually make and have already made.

Think lucid dreaming : right now we are in *cough* cult stage *cough* in 100 year it will be official religion and we will be saints

hahahahahahaha i wouldnt mind being considered a saint .....i think it would have a certain...ring to it.

Originally posted by jlambie+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jlambie)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-pOOp

cult: wannabe religion that is led by people who make it all up for money,

hmmmmmmmmmmm.....i don't know how much you know about the catholic church....and how much money they actually make and have already made.[/b]

yeah but they're not in it just for the money, even though they take a certain percentage of your income. The only times that the leaders dont believe what they are teaching, is when a sick person just becomes a priest so he can molest children.

What i said up there is just my opinion, you can ignore it if you please...

Originally posted by pOOp

The only times that the leaders dont believe what they are teaching, is when a sick person just becomes a priest so he can molest children.

What i said up there is just my opinion, you can ignore it if you please...

Or if you're any of the bishops, trying to cover up what the preists did...

Originally posted by jlambie
Or if you're any of the bishops, trying to cover up what the preists did...

true, true aah this is way over my head... i shouldnt have gotten involved

everyone's opinion is wanted and appreciated.

When you think about it, all religions are cults.

YOUR SIG IS SAD AND GORY

Originally posted by jlambie
everyone's opinion is wanted and appreciated. *

Funny, because I always say random idiots on the internet "Your opinion is neither wanted nor appreciated, thank you for your cooperation." That's a hell of a coincidence

A religion has a lot of people, a cult has a few people. Religion can be for money, and cults can be for money.

[quote]

100 years ago the Mormons were a cult.

we where? if this is true then long live my mormon cult hold on im LDS
ok some one better own me

Originally posted by docthory+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(docthory)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-bradybaker

100 years ago the Mormons were a cult.

we where? if this is true then long live my mormon cult hold on im LDS
ok some one better own me[/b]

cult ( P ) Pronunciation Key (klt) from Dictionary.com
n.

A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
The object of such devotion.
An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest

Basically a cult is something where people are generally extremists where they practice things that are not considered normal by other religious denominations. They also typically follow a person rather than a diety. Money is generally a big part in these situations...promising a place in paradise if they will buy it, basically.

A religion on the other hand tends to be more laidback, following a deity such as Jesus or Christ, or Buddha. They tend to be more "sociably acceptable"

spairearhrke: Thanks for the definition Mr. Webster. But the real question is: who decides what is extreme and what isn't? Who decides what other other religious denominations consider "normal"? And who decides which beliefs are more culturally acceptable?

The truth is that, in most cases, the longer a belief hangs around, the more socially acceptable it becomes. Therefore after a long enough period of time, any cult can become a religion. Take Christianity for example, about 2 millenia ago it was made up of very people who were often not considered socially acceptable. Today its a major world "religion".

And I don't know how many of you have been to church (most of you I assume) but I find all of those chants and songs and prayers and such pretty cultish, don't you? Come on..admit it!

Yes the never ending question of who gets to decide what is normal. I think that the only answer to that would be that you are the only one who can answer yourself as to what is normal and what is not. If you are set in believing that a religion is a cult or vice versa then you will no matter who or what tells you otherwise.

Yes i do agree that the longer a religion sticks around the more socially accepted it becomes. Besides usually if its a cult it won't last longer than a few years anyways because they will have all committed mass suicide .

But when it comes down to the nitty-gritty only you will be able to make that call to say what makes a cult a cult.

Hahaha, I love the conversation, religion and cult.. whats the difference, this is beautiful. Whats really funny is that we have to discuss this... There's supposed to be no similarities between the two, but they are a lot more like each other than we think

if you mean the imposed definition and not the absolute one, its simple: If a group of people do good stuff together for a god/gods/spiritual leader, its a religion. If people do bad stuff together for a god/gods/spiritual leader, its a cult. Thats generally how they are portrayed anyways.

I think that those of us who are seeking the deep questions like who are we and why are we here are really spiritual beings. We are seeking something which can't be found by conventional, material means. The answer lies within us all.
This question has been emerging in human consciousness for the last several thousand years as we have further evolved. Part of it was spawned from the actualization of the inevitability of our own death. Hence, humankind created religion, a result of the development of the "god" part of the brain. (see http://godpart.com)
I can imagine that every single religion we have today had to start with "cultish" ideas at some part or in some way! What defines something as a "cult" or "religion" all has to do with the perception of either individuals or a social establishment. We always have to wonder about new things, especially when they are similar to old things that have often been corrupt. Such is the case with our need to label something as a "cult". Often times, this is very necessary! Many people/groups have come forth, and are yet in power now that are leading people to exercise fanatic belief. But often times too somebody/a group of people comes forward with ideas that are rejected as "cultish" and then they turn out to be very true and it develops into a religion. Jesus was rejected by his people (The Jews) as vehemently as most of us reject cult leaders today, but what really mattered was that he was NOT false, and that factor of truth in his words and his ideas remained even until today.
Belief is fine. We all need something to hold on to, because those of us who are seeking the answer to the fundamental questions of our existence need some form of satiation.
It is only dangerous when belief causes us to shut out other facets of our journey to understand ourself and our role in this world. For example, some forms of Christianity would completely condemn meditation and lucid dreaming. However, if you were to listen to that and then not practice either thing again, yet you had deep down an urge and need for it, you might risk going through your life never discovering your true potential.
Essentiallty, we have two things: fanatacism and faith. Fanatacism is the insatiable need for certainty. That sort ot thing spawns cults. But faith in being is a satiable attainment of inner knowing. Those of us who have faith in our being (as individuals and as humanity) will go on to seek the higher truth and we will use our spiritual discernment to always grow toward our higher self (both as individuals and as humanity).

My opinion (as of today, this moment, as I type these words): religion is a mature cult. If you imagine the core of human ideaology to be a great tree, and each person's thinking is a branch, then cults are the fruits that first come up on the tree. In the beginning they are not ripe, and many of them, if plucked prematurely, will rot and be discarded. However, some come to be ripe and they feed many for a long time, and their seeds can be used to grow new trees.
We are all trying to grow together and uphold one another. I think this basic truth and way of being is something we should all check every cult/religious institution for. I completely agree when you say that many cults (and sometimes purported religions!) do not believe what they say and are driven on materialism, not spirituality. Many religious institutions are also driven by fanatacism (not all, though). Classical example: most of the Christian church condemns homosexuality (sorry, have to use this, its today's hot issue). Now, an individual who is raised by this particular church is homosexual. Science has proven that homosexuality is not simply behaviorally conditioned but that there are actual anatomical structures in the postmortem brain found in homosexuals and not in heterosexuals that are often implicated in perception of attraction. But the church condemns it for this individual, because it is certain that God has said its wrong and they have to "fix themself". So, this person condemns homosexuality, gets rid of his/her current lover, and later married an opposite sex partner and has a family. Years later he is charged for molesting his children. When asked why he did it, to his therapist, he tells them that he just was not happy with his wife in bed. This is just one case I have encountered before, but it is a classical message: we must never think, for one moment, that we know the whole story! To do so would be like leaving flowers in a dark room.

If any of your guys are interested in discussing this issue with me further, pm me. I love to talk about this stuff!

Originally posted by Ev
Think lucid dreaming : right now we are in *cough* cult stage *cough* in 100 year it will be official religion and we will be saints

I like this idea....
Stephen LaBerge, Seeker, and Icedawg would be our gods and all the mods would be "demi-gods" or sumthing

lol, to the person that said 100 years ago mormanism was a cult, you DO realize that the lutheran church at least, and most protestant churches, probably catholic and coptic too, TEACH THEIR CHILDREN that mormanism is a cult?

and docthory, u sound very much like someone i know when the cult issue comes up, only it's more of, "Oh no, I'm a cultist! Run, run away! I might contaminate you! I'm a bad influence! I don't believe in the trinity! Protect the children!" or something along those lines; usually not all strung together, those are just collected over a good amount of time.

A cult doesn't necessarily have to do with the physical SIZE of the group/organization. There are many (like myself) who STILL consider the LDS church to be a cult - the definition of which is usually based on a religious organization's strict adherence to at least a few things such as:" 1. One has to be a member of their church in order to be sure of salvation 2. They are the only "true church" (as opposed to other denominations, sects, etc.) 3. They have a self-appointed leader/originator who claims to have "extra" revelation from God 4. Doctrine is taught on a "need-to-know" basis (for example, deeper church doctrine or "strange" teaching is reserved only for leaders or the more "spiritually mature." 5. There is usually an element of brainwashing or strict control exerted over members of the church by leadership (i.e. if you don't do this particular practice, you get the boot or some other serious from of discipline)
There may be other things as well, but this is my generric cultometer.

I think a cult can be considered a "religion" but not vice versa since religion is a larger more general descriptive term wheras cult is more specific.

Originally posted by evangel
A cult doesn't necessarily have to do with the physical SIZE of the group/organization. There are many (like myself) who STILL consider the LDS church to be a cult - the definition of which is usually based on a religious organization's strict adherence to at least a few things such as:\" 1. One has to be a member of their church in order to be sure of salvation 2. They are the only \"true church\" (as opposed to other denominations, sects, etc.) 3. They have a self-appointed leader/originator who claims to have \"extra\" revelation from God 4. Doctrine is taught on a \"need-to-know\" basis (for example, deeper church doctrine or \"strange\" teaching is reserved only for leaders or the more \"spiritually mature.\" 5. There is usually an element of brainwashing or strict control exerted over members of the church by leadership (i.e. if you don't do this particular practice, you get the boot or some other serious from of discipline)
There may be other things as well, but this is my generric cultometer.

I think a cult can be considered a \"religion\" but not vice versa since religion is a larger more general descriptive term wheras cult is more specific.

according to your own definition of cult, the LDS church is not one...good job there