Marks of a Cult

Bob, I thought we were talking about what makes a cult. Now it seems you are trying to argue about the RC faith. You should start a thread on that if that is what you want to allege (that the RC is a cult).

I'm sticking to the topic.

 

Jude,

John Gilmore posted....

...which encourages me regarding the "Anglican" faith.

Which is it, do you guys affirm the biblical truth of justification through faith alone or dont you?

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

You are using a circular argument.

The topic is on the marks of a cult and the marks are defined by the practices and teachings of the group.

I am contrasting errors practices and teachings of various groups - and showing that history indicates that the one group is far more damaging than another.

The "whole point" is to objectively define (not by popularity contest - but by sound Bible based reasons) the term cult.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob Ryan posted...

I simply cannot understand how anyone who concerns themselves with cults can fail to include Catholicism. It just amazes me.

I was involved in a discussion recently where someone who was their acknowledged...over and over again...

There is one God, not 3.

The Father is God.

Jesus Christ is God.

The Holy Spirit is God.

They sometimes interact with one another, so they arent the same entity bouncing back and forth all the time.

This person basically was with us on every aspect of the understanding we call the "trinity", except that he didnt use that word, and he didnt like to say "persons", but rather "manifestations".

In addition, he acknowledged justification by faith alone, and the scriptures as our only authority.

He was not "oneness". He didnt claim it was one God bouncing back and forth. He understood that they sometimes interact with each other.(Jesus praying to God the Father, etc)

Yet because he didnt like the word "trinity", and he wasnt comfortable with "persons" he was condemned and labeled a heretic.

While there were RCCers there who were thought of as christian, in spite of the overflowing falsehoods and idolatries they flow from Rome.

It's very odd.

God bless,

Mike

[ June 11, 2004, 03:09 AM: Message edited by: D28guy ]

 

Those who deny the God of three persons, the blessed Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; who deny that Jesus is God and man; and who deny that Jesus is our one Redeemer, worship an idol of their own creation. When these idol worshippers gather together, they do not form a church. They are rightly called a cult.

[ June 11, 2004, 06:34 AM: Message edited by: John Gilmore ]

 

"I simply cannot understand how anyone who concerns themselves with cults can fail to include Catholicism. It just amazes me."
''
To many it's a size thing, one simply does not describe the largest branch of a worldreligion as a cult.
And yes the Catholic Church is as large as the rest of Christianity combined.
To put things in proper perspective, Catholicism contains cults, Protestant churches sometimes are cults.

 

John Gilmore,

If you are referring to my post just above yours, this person acknowledged all of that, except that he didint like the word persons, even though when he described how they interacted with one another, he clearly saw them is uniquely different, although one God.

The only one that he was comfortable with using the word "person" was Jesus.

Are you saying someone is condemned because of one word that they dont use, even though their heart beliefs are in essence the same as ours?

God bless,

Mike

 

D28guy,

The Modalists are idol worshippers. In their twisted cult, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not 3 persons but 3 modes of God's activity; God revealed Himself as Father in the work of creation, as Son in the work of redemption, and as the Holy Spirit in the work of sanctification. And, yes, they are condemned. 2 Peter 2:1.

 

John,

He is not a modalist.

He simply uses a different word.

You condemn him for liking the wrong word?

God bless,

Mike

 

Idol worshippers????? You mean to tell me that because the 'Oneness' saints of God believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are God, that they worship an idol?

MEE

 

Modalism has been considered a heresy by every branch of Christianity (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Free Church, Baptist) since Sabellius and Praexas were teaching it in Tertullian's day (early 200s). Besides denying the orthodox teaching on the Trinity, the Modalists also teach a works salvation.

 

Yeah, and plus, they didn't come out of us (like most of the "cults" we speak of); we came out of them. So it would be hard to describe them as a cult. Still, I do think our apologists should be more consistant in including them as false. But as I think Bob has been trying to say, they focus so much on the Trinity, that as long as you accept that, you may get over as basically "orthodox". (Bob should be happy, because that's how the SDA gets over with CRI and others!) They have been easy on Campbellism too. I guess CRI and others do write articles on these groups, but once again, they are not included in the "cult" books, which are their signature statements about heresies within Christendom.

 

Not all modalists teach works salvation. Just this modern hypercharismatic movement.
Even though it is aberrant (misunderstands the distinctions within the Godhead), and the church always opposed it; since it does accept who Christ is, you can't really say it is idol worship. As I have pointed out on LORD vs. Lord, there are so-called trinitarians who go the opposite way and say the Godhead is like three men in unity, and one person kept saying "three beings, and then you have "one what three who's", and these to me are worse than modalism (two hoplessly divide the unity, the last sacrifices it altogether by making it impersonal!), yet these all are accepted as "orthodoxy", and the latter now even promoted by our apologists.

 

Though Mioque is consistent in framing opinions in a RC biased model - (while claiming to be non-RC) I certainly agree here.

The only reason for excluding the RCC from the list of cults - is that you abandon the criteria of "doctrinal error" as the measure by which you would make the assignment.

A classic example: If cigarettes were introduced today as a new product they would never make it out of the gate. The FDA would block them - they would fail to pass muster as it were.

But since they are already out - and a large industry is behind them - it is legal to sell over the counter.

Mique is correct that "size" is the only that prevents the attachment of "cult" to the RCC. (As lite and shallow as that kind of criteria is). Using such a simple model - the Jewish church in doctrinal error was "orthodox" and the SMALL NT church was "a cult".

In Christ,

Bob

 

So that would be ...

John the Baptist,

The Disciples..

The Woman at the Well.

Mary the mother of Christ.

...

They were in error on the very point you mentioned.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Mike said

Indeed - if uses as the measure "doctrinal error" they would appear to qualify.

If one uses as the measure 'number of christians they tortured and killed' they would seem to qualify.

If one uses as the measure "degree to which the leader is claimed to be infallible" they would seem to qualify.

But if you use "who is the biggest and most popular" - well then...

Having said all of that - I think Catholics are Christians and are saved if they accept Christ as their savior RCC not withstanding.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Modalism may be considered "heresy" and the Jews didn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah either, but that didn't it so!

Sabellius was only trying to hold to the original doctrine of "One God." The doctrine of the Trinity (three persons) came from the Catholic Church. Check church history!

I would provide a link, but it's not allowed on the BB.

MEE

 

I know a little church history. I teach it.


The doctrine of the Trinity is not exclusively Catholic. The great church father Tertullian was not a Catholic, and he is the one who first coined the term "Trinity" to describe the relationship between Father, Son, and Spirit which is amply taught in the Bible. Furthermore, the Baptists, who were not ever Catholic, and who are not Protestant, because we never protested against the "faith delivered to the saints," are, and with the exception of a few heretics, have been Trinitarian. Patrick, who was most certainly NOT Roman Catholic (no matter how they have tried to co-opt him and Celtic Christianity), taught the Trinity as well. The Donatists, who were not Catholic, taught the Trinity, as did the Lollards, the Waldensians, and the Hussites.

 

Modalism may be considered "heresy" and the Jews didn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah either, but that didn't it so!

Sabellius was only trying to hold to the original doctrine of "One God." The doctrine of the Trinity (three persons) came from the Catholic Church. Check church history!

I would provide a link, but it's not allowed on the BB.

MEE </font>[/QUOTE]Hey Mee!
Are links not allowed on the BB or is this just a rule concerning certain links?

 

Modalism may be considered "heresy" and the Jews didn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah either, but that didn't it so!

Sabellius was only trying to hold to the original doctrine of "One God." The doctrine of the Trinity (three persons) came from the Catholic Church. Check church history!

I would provide a link, but it's not allowed on the BB.

MEE </font>[/QUOTE]Hey Mee!
Are links not allowed on the BB or is this just a rule concerning certain links? </font>[/QUOTE]atestring, yes links are allowed, but, as far as I know, not ones showing the Oneness of God.

The ones showing three persons, being one God, are allowed. Can't figure them out, and I don't think anyone else can either....at least that is what Billy Graham says.

MEE