I'm just taking this topic to another thread hopefully to not continue hijacking Chucks thread.
I actually started typing in a search " Are (whatever denomination) a cult?)
So far every denomination I've searched has an article proclaiming them as a cult.
__________________ And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
Last edited by Leafrivermac; 03-15-2011 at 07:44 AM.
According to the Wikapedia..I would be considered in a cult..
The word cultpejoratively refers to a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre.[
My Christian practices are quite radical from the normal church ..at least in our area..I hear His voice...I hav e no TV ..I strive to fast often..I wear JESUS shirts...smile like a blooming idiot....attend an Epicopal mass every Sunday at 7:30 ..in which the priest serves us real wine....children were home schooled..and I claim to have seen Jesus and speak with other tongues..
Diffently cult material...or maybe 'peculiar' people. { -;
love the teachings of Max Lucado..who is Church of Christ.
and Adrain Rogers ..Southern Baptist..
and mentored by a black Pentecostal women preacher...
I consider a cult one that distorts, adds to or takes away from the word, one that do not consider everyword in the bible to be directly from God and certainly one that believes in works taking away from what Jesus did on the cross ( no man can earn his way to heaven). I also consider one a cult that does not believe that Father, Son and Holy Ghost as God in three persons.
"I consider a cult one that distorts, adds to or takes away from the word, one that do not consider everyword in the bible to be directly from God and certainly one that believes in works taking away from what Jesus did on the cross ( no man can earn his way to heaven)." Rev wrote this...
Rev...could you elaborate a little on .." Certainly one that beleives in works."
Chuck, it's pretty simple, Eph 2: 8-9. vs. 9 says not of works. There are many that say you must do certain things other than being born again to be saved. If you want to believe that my must be baptized and profess your faith in Jesus, I don't have a problem with that. But there are some that teach that you must do certain rituals to be saved like attending church, must pay tithes, you must cover your head, not smoke, drink alcohol, dance, women should not wear pants... Paul didn't say in Romans 10:13 “For whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved, and not dance, or smoke or tithe, or drive the school bus on Sunday.. The salvation message is pretty simple cut and dry, man likes to add things to make him feel good about himself.
With that being said, works are not for salvation they are for a righteous and pure clean life, being an example to the rest of the world that we are children of the Most High God; and a manifestation that one is truly born again (old things pass away).
I would question those that live like the devil are really saved, but that’s not for me to decide, that’s God’s business as the only Judge. I say it many times, you can’t hold hands with the devil and walk with God.
To make it real plain, no one can earn his way to heaven! That price has already been paid, with blood!
One might say, Faith without works is dead! Okay, I agree with that, if you're truly saved and a child of God, you will have works, the two just go together.
I also consider one a cult that does not believe that Father, Son and Holy Ghost as God in three persons.
I'm not argueing the Godhead here, but rather pointing to the inconsistancy of the defining of the term "cult". Is it based upon what a man believes, as stated above?
Or is it based soley upon what the scripture plainly declares?
This was the words leading up to the above statement.
I consider a cult one that distorts, adds to or takes away from the word, one that do not consider everyword in the bible to be directly from God and certainly one that believes in works taking away from what Jesus did on the cross ( no man can earn his way to heaven).
The term "God in three persons" isn't found anywhere in the scripture. It is added by the ideas of men to bolster an unscriptural view of The Godhead. Must we keep the word of God in its purest form possible, or can we tweek, bend, add to, and take away from to support our personal views?
I was shot at as promoting "cultish" views (along with others) because I reject a doctrine that cannot be taught from the scriptures without some adjusting or tweeking by man. It requires some adding to and some taking away before it will stand. My point from the beginning was to apply the same judgement evenly and fairly unto all. As a believer in the scriptural teaching that The Lord our God is One Lord, I am labeled as a "Cult". I challenge anyone to produce a scripture that says "God is three". I challenge anyone to produce a scripture that uses the term, "eternal Son".
I even believe and allow for the salvation of Trinitarians (and others) if they have walked in the light that God has given them. Yet I am labeled as a cult, by those who reject the scripture which plainly declared that the fullness of The Godhead dwelt bodily.
I would be careful when slamming the door, while pointing my finger.