Latest / Clear Path Christianity / Did I Just Leave One CULT to Join Another?! || CPC Podcast Ep. 22
Transcript
- Cole Crone: this does have this does have much more of a James T. Kirk vibe to it Which I like. You familiar with the work of James T. Kirk, captain of the USS Enterprise? Did he have a strike chair? No, but he had a he had it had I feel like it had arms like this. Mm, yeah, that's true. That's true. Okay. Well, the the episode this week is sort of in response to one of the earliest comments that I got on YouTube from it was I don't even remember which episode it was, but it was early days. And the person their comment was basically that We had left one cult and found another. And I do find that to be a relatively common criticism. And it comes from people that I think either intentionally or unintentionally use the term cult in a very particular way. And we use the term cult in a very particular way. And it could have even been a comment on that episode. I believe it was episode two. And we talked about what is a cult, and I provided a definition from the Encyclopedia Britannica and we went from there, which I will I will provide that definition again, an expanded version, as well as other other options. So this has become a pretty common criticism, and so I'm this episode I think I'm gonna try to again defend my use of the word cult and hopefully put of course people are gonna continue to comment and say you know this over and over and over again but it it will at least clear up my use of the term. And it does th this critique admittedly comes fr from online atheists, obviously. And I recognize that online atheists probably don't represent all all atheists or particul or atheists the majority view within the atheistic population by by any stretch. I certainly wouldn't want quote unquote Christian YouTube comments to be seen as representative of or or any social media comments by quote unquote Christians to be seen as the majority view. Of course they aren't. However, the criticism itself can be easily defended simply by defining one's terms, which is why I did so in that episode. I defined cult very particularly along the sociological definition. So in this episode, we are going to examine that criticism and try to compare cults to religions and hopefully do so. Not emotionally, but as honestly as possible. So let's let's start by looking at what people might mean when they use the word cult. Now, Merriam Webster lists the formal definition of a cult as quote A system of religious beliefs and rituals. Now of course every religion in the world would fall under that blanket definition of a cult. Now, this is a convenient definition if you are trying to place all spiritual all of spirituality under the same umbrella. Now, the definition that that I prefer, and the definition that I provided in episode two of this podcast, comes from the Encyclopedia Britannica. And rather than just provide the definition this time, I figured I would expand upon that a little bit more. And add some more of the context which is provided Again, Encyclopedia Britannica. It says, cult is usually a small group devoted to a person, an idea, or a philosophy. Now that last time that's where I stopped. And so that is the definition that I see used over and over and over again in the philosophical, sociological research that that that I have done on this topic. Now, this time I'll continue. The term cult is often applied to a religious movement that exists in some degree of tension with the dominant religious or cultural inclination of a society. So here in the West, I live in America, if you can't tell, and the predominant religious structure in at least the last however long our country has been, it's I think right about two hundred fifty by the time I'm recording this two hundred and fifty and some months. And for that duration, Christianity has been the predominant religious feature of our society. And so groups that have arisen within America that have taken a a different view on God and the Bible and other things have typically been labeled cults. And if you'll recall from episode two of the podcast, I I again I don't think that is a very good way of classifying. Just because a group has beliefs that are as as the encyclopedia britannica puts it that exist in some degree of tension with the with the dominant religious or cultural inclination of a society I don't think that alone makes a thing a cult. And I'm I'm gonna get into more of that. And that's the part where I'm gonna have to try to get not get fired up. Now in recent years as The encyclopedia continues. In recent years, the word cult has been commonly used as a pejorative term for a religious group that falls outside of the mainstream and by implication engages in questionable activities. Now we're starting to get a little bit closer, by my estimation, and from my experience, as the group that I was born and raised in, very much falls under this piece of the definition. as the co as there are a a a a veritable cornucopia of questionable activities taking place within the group that I came out of. Many new religions are controversially labeled as cults. And that is the end of the first paragraph of the entry. Now I like adding not just this definition but this extra This extra expansion it defines the term in more modern parlance, as well as considering the sociological understanding of a cult. Because it's it's easy to just slap a a term on a group as a as a means of dismissing them. as as dim as dismissing the whole the whole group. So today, especially in the online space, the word cult gets used for almost everything, such as sociopolitical ideologies, CrossFit, Apple fans, fans of particular sports teams. All all of these things they're they're movies, right? We s we hear of movies that have a cult following, right? Cults are not merely a passionate community. It is a community that systematically and systemically controls people by manipulating authority, information, identity, certain relationships, and so on. the a second piece of criticism that I that I hear or that I read online is that because Christianity makes exclusive truth claims that it expects adherents to believe it isn't just that The group expects adherents to believe a certain set of propositions, but those beliefs are meant to do some form of behavior modification. So if you are part of a religious system that has certain beliefs, that you are expected not only to believe, but that those beliefs are meant to change the way that you think and live. People will say that you are part of a cult. Now, while it is true that Christianity does make exclusive truth claims, for example, over the last few years is something akin to Christ is King or Jesus is king or that Jesus is Lord. someone is king or that someone is lord is to say that other people aren't. it is by its very nature an exclusivity claim. another another statement would be that the gospel is true. Christianity teaches definitively that the gospel is true. And for something to be true, it means that other things have to be false. So you have an exclusivity claim there. a a third would be not every belief about God is equally correct. I think that is anybody who is making a positive claim about any subject, whether consciously or subconsciously does so is is by definition saying that other things are not true. So if you say that the sky is blue, whether consciously or subconsciously, you are saying that it is not red, because red is not blue. It's it's I mean, this is pretty elementary, but in our ever more postmodern world, you would be surprised how difficult that can be to accept for some people. Now that that doesn't make it a cult. Otherwise, again, as I said before, many other things would have to be labeled as cults. Many other things that no person in their right mind would just flippantly call a cult would then fall under this umbrella category. just a few examples. Mathematics makes exclusive truth claims. Two plus two does not equal five. And when you say two plus two equals four, you are implicitly stating that two plus two does not equal five, or does not equal seven, or does not equal ten thousand, You are making an exclusive truth claim. science would be another example. Science tells us that gravity has a certain force, meaning that it doesn't have other forces. That's an exclusive truth claim. History makes exclusive claims. George Washington is the first president of the United States, meaning that Thomas Jefferson isn't, and Abraham Lincoln isn't, and JFK isn't the first president of the United States. So truth by definition excludes error or excludes Other things presenting themselves as truth claims. Now, the difference that I found, particularly within Christianity, is whether or not the truth claims that are proposed can be examined by adherents to the religion. That is a big question. If you aren't allowed To examine the truth claims, that's when you move from something more akin to a cult than a religion. And that leads me to my next point, which is that Christianity invites investigation. And I have used These three passages as proof of this teaching coming from the Bible over and over and over again. So I'm not gonna expound upon them, and anyone with any familiarity with the Bible is gonna be able to go to these passages themselves and see if what I'm saying here is true or not. But I I use these in an attempt to undermine the attempts of high control. religious groups that want to dissuade people from wanting evidence. But again, they're they're worth stating and paraphrasing for the purposes here. Acts 17 is the big one that I go to. Paul praises the Bereans for actually checking his teachings against the scriptures. So they believe that the scriptures provide a Some form or another of objective truth, Paul comes along and begins to teach a fulfillment of these scriptures, and they're meant to go back and actually see: is are the things Paul saying coming out of left field or not? a second one in First Corinthians 15, Paul tells the Corinthians that eyewitnesses to the resurrection are still alive, so that if a a Corinthian was so inclined, they could have go seek out one of these eyewitnesses and say, Hey, this Paul guy came to our town talking about th this crazy notion that Jesus of Nazareth was dead, he was killed via crucifixion and rose on the third day. Like what's up with that? And they could have met with by Paul's recollection, upwards of five hundred People that they could have found that were eyewitnesses to the resurrection. This is Paul inviting the Corinthians to test his claims. And then in 1 John 4:1, again, John tells his readers, we've used this lots and lots and lots of times, that John is trying to get his readers to test the spirits, to test all spirits, whether they are of God. And many, many, many more passages could be cited here, but It seems to me that Christianity is something that has been taught from again, from its f founding documents. Christians are not expected to have what we would consider to be blind faith or a belief absent evidence. So my my my point here is that oftentimes cults will say something like just trust us or just trust that guy or just trust this other dude who's been dead for a hundred years. Historic Christianity has always said, Here are the sources and search them for yourselves. And that is a massive difference for me between where I came from and and a lot of the types of groups that I have looked into and researched operate and what I have found to be the case within biblical historical Christianity. Now another major contrast concerns authority in in healthy religious systems. There there isn't any one person who gets to define or redefine the the the parameters of the religion. So for example, just speaking of Christianity, God has already told us what Christianity is. And so no pastor, no single denomination, no modern prophet. No individual congregation is allowed to then redefine what Christianity is. As soon as we do that, now we've just created the potential for something way more like a cult than Christianity. So in healthy Christian communities specifically. Authorities are accountable to the scriptures. They are accountable to what Jude called in Jude 3 the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. So you have the scriptures, you have the faith that was delivered to the saints, and then you have the broader church, meaning that no one congregation, no one pastor should be able to create. his own movement and call it Christianity, especially if it has nothing to do with what has come before. So in in Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, most of Protestantism, and many, if not most, non denominational churches, despite having many, many, many significant theological differences, All recognize certain fundamentals of the faith and Within within reason And and somewhat shockingly, there is virtual agreement on many of, if not all, of the fundamentals of the faith of Christianity. Now, this is this is a stark contrast with cults, and that contrast can come in one of several forms. You might have the idea of one founder or one prophet. or one apostle or one unique interpretation. Now all all of that one one or one or more of those will seize all of the authority and bind or attempt to bind the conscience of the whole in ways contrary to the historic consensus. So when power and influence become unequally distributed and is wielded by anyone but God. If there is a God, anything like what the Abrahamic religions have believed to be the case, then he would be the source of all authority as the creator. He would have creators rights and all authority would belong to him. And so anybody who tries to gain that power and influence and bind the conscience of others, then you're probably going to if you don't already, you will in short order have a cult on your hands. the next piece is that Christianity does not need isolation. And I know I've been over this many, times, so I will kind of just breeze through this point. But one of the most powerful parts of the movement that that I made and that my family made from cult into Christianity was the fact that Christianity does not need isolation. The the brand of Christianity that we were raised with required isolation. not just isolating the individuals within the cult from people outside of the cult, but isolating people within the cult from ideas or or teachings or experiences or it's it was it was total cognitive isolation, total physical isolation, and and and on and on, complete spiritual isolation. So when I began exploring Christianity, some of my questions were does Christianity require me to cut off my family? Because I was part of a group that said yes. And and then when I began to actually engage with real Christians, the answer became something else. Does Christianity require me to avoid outsiders? Am I required to reject all criticism? Just on the face of it, just like, that's criticism, rejected, without actually thinking about whether it's valid or not. can I can I consult outside sources? Do am I only allowed to look at approved literature, or can I just go to my local library, go to the religion section and actually look at some of these things for myself? The the answers to these questions told me that Christianity doesn't have anything to hide. Now, historically speaking, Christians spread Christianity in a number of public ways, from preaching publicly to engaging critics, to writing books, holding debates, translating the scriptures so that more and more and more people could actually look at the material for themselves, building schools and universities With the express purpose of educating people. Now, healthy Christianity has always been public while cults have always survived through isolation. Now the next the next piece of this concerns the type of leader that you typically find within a cult and how that contrasts with the type of leader that you would typically find in a Christian church. Where cult leaders usually have some kind of selfish ulterior motive for leading their people, Jesus Christ calls his followers. and asks them to lead by giving up their selfishness in favor of others. For example, Jesus said, Let the greatest amount or the greatest among you shall be your servant, Matthew 23, 11. Furthermore, the New Testament repeatedly portrays leaders as shepherds. Or as servants or as examples. And these are all others focused concepts. Now I have to, of course, admit at this point that far too often, within Christianity, we see very little difference between a Christian leader. and a celebrity and that is a failure on our part. that is a that is a failure on the part of those leaders to live up to the standard of Christ. So if if you have been a part of a movement whose whose leadership looked more like a celebrity than a humble servant, that that isn't a failure on the part of Christ. That is a failure on the part of that leader. And a failure on the part of the rest of us for not calling that person out sooner. And I'm sure there I'm sure there are a a lot of examples, probably several popping up in your head right now. But the the New Testament measures leaders by what they are willing to sacrifice for the flock. And cults measure. followers by what they're willing to sacrifice for the organization. And that switch makes a huge difference between a cult on the one hand and a healthy religious system on the other. Now the the biggest difference for me, at least in in my mind as I'm assessing the two, is who is at the center. Because it it seems to me that in my experience and and from from the research that I've done, cults ultimately revolve around one of a few things. It could be preserving the system. that the in the entire everything revolves around maintaining the existence of the system. So anybody who comes along and challenges the status quo is immediately ostracized, if not removed entirely. Because the the ultimate goal of the system is survival. a second a second major piece of this might be that the cult is designed to protect the leaders. So rather than preserving the system, all we're trying to do is keep our leadership, keep power in the hands of our leadership. And the third might be to simply just maintain the traditions. And that that's kind of more like the system that I came up in. Anything that challenged the traditions or anything that presented a different perspective was immediately disregarded because the traditions of the group were God for all intents and purposes. So conversely, when we look at Christianity proper, we see that biblical historical Christianity revolves around Jesus, revolves around the person of Christ. everything else is secondary. So no matter how powerful or influential a particular Christian leader might be, they are always going to be at least second fiddle to the Savior Himself. When when I told people that I was leaving the cult that I came up in, I was told that I was leaving the church, quote unquote. Not one person, not one person told me that I was leaving Jesus. Everybody who I talked to as I was leaving the community that I was born and raised in framed my exodus in terms of me leaving the community rather than me abandoning the person they were meant to have at the center of their worldview. Now that is the biggest difference that I have experienced between. being in a cult and being a part of Christianity, who is at the center. Because healthy churches want people to follow Jesus, even if it means that they move to another church down the road and they lose a member of their community. And that is to me a fundamental difference between the two. So this is the part where I'm gonna try not to get fired up. When I first began getting comments like this on YouTube or on Instagram or Substack or any of the number of places that we place our content. People were telling me that I was in a cult, even though I had moved f from a genuine cult into just a a world religion. I had a very emotional reaction. I could actually feel my blood begin to boil. And the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it it it's just blind ignorance. And nothing classifies or quantifies my life for the first. thirty-two years of it anyways, more than the term blind ignorance. And so I I can kind of understand I can kind of understand the sentiment. Now To me, no one who actually escaped a cult would tell you that Christianity is a cult. That I know for a fact, because I know a lot of I know a lot of people who grew up in cults personally, and whether they left that cult to become an agnostic or they left that cult to become a a Christian. And and everything in between. nobody would call Christianity or any of the world religions a cult. Nobody that I know who actually came out of one would would make that equation because it's very clearly a false equation. not only is that grossly offensive to the over two billion Christians in the world, but it it minimizes the severity of Of real abuses and oppression going on inside cults. So maybe that's a laughing matter to you, but I know hundreds of people who have needlessly died because they were a part of a cult. And I don't know anybody who has needlessly died because they were doing their best to follow Jesus Christ. I don't think that I I left a cult to join another. And I think it anybody who says otherwise is is just is just ignorant of what the facts are. I left a system that demanded my loyalty and found a savior who actually earned it.