How Not To Be Deceived By Cults (Even Christian Ones)

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

None of these verses mentioned actually apply to cults. For example you have liberally extended James 1.22 to apply to cults which goes beyond the stated context of self deception. There is nothing in the text or context that indicates it should apply to cult deception which is about being deceived by others, not the self.

James explains why we are deceived.

1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him.

God is not here finding fault, on the contrary our experience in being deceived showed we had some basic failings and if we pray God will provide the wisdom we need. Likewise if you are stuck in a cult or are unsure if you are.

1:6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

You can’t be in a cult without questioning the things you see. Did you question that without wavering, or when you were told that focusing on the negative things is “death” did you get driven by the wind and tossed?

1:7-8 For let not that man think he shall receive anything of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

You must decide conscience or cult. Those that are seduced into a cult are later ashamed because they know they ignored their conscience.

Referring to saints as being “rich” in the word, or in life is a major red flag. V.9-10

The reason people get ensnared into a cult is we were drawn away by our own lusts. Perhaps the idea that you were special or better than other Christians was the lure. Any discussion of special revelation, special blessing, or proper ground is a major red flag. V. 14-15

Those in a cult will ask “how could this be false if the teachings are good” know that “every good gift is from above”. The “truths” didn’t come from the cult leader, the truths came from God.

“Be ye doers of the word not hearers only” v. 22. Just as women are saved through child bearing, and it is through bearing fruit that you will be my disciples in deed. Being a doer of the word protects us from cults.

Pure religion is to visit the fatherless and widows v.27. If you are not doing that then your worship is not pure.

Pure religion is to keep yourself unspotted from the world. Many cults scam the members into business interests run by the leaders.

James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. When you study cults there is always the respect of certain persons, the inner circle, the key brothers, etc. That is essentially the definition of cult.

James made mistakes because the other saints in the Body had faith in the Lord Jesus with respect of persons, James. As a result James can get the vision to say this word.

I imagine the early church may have also had the same opinion towards James that I had towards WL. He is the "brother of Jesus, surely we can trust his judgment".

James 3:16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. Confusion and evil work are major warnings.

3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.

The various business dealings that cults are involved in are obviously not "pure" and yet so many are willing to wink at that or ignore that. I appreciate how precise James is here.

Then peaceable -- we think of cults like Manson, Jim Jones and Koresh and it is striking how they are not peaceable.

Easy to be intreated -- wow, what a contrast with our experience with the LRC, or JWs or again the Branch Davidians. The minute they are intreated they lock up the doors and get the guns.

Full of mercy -- instead of full of lawsuits.

Partiality and hypocrisy -- the two hallmarks of any cult.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

James explains why we are deceived...

The term "cult" is too broad to be able to extract some points "from the bible" and say "follow these 10 points and you won't be deceived by a cult". Cults can range from very strict Pharisee-like behaviors and top-down hierarchy to very care-free new age sorts. Some of the verses mentioned apply more to Judaism and would apply to any cults that have Jewish-like traits, but probably don't apply to a new age sort of cult.

I'm not saying it could not apply to cults, but I think the letter is primarily aimed at individuals within the church, not at warning them about outsiders in cults. Also, the instructions could be equally applied to any sect or religion, Judaism or Gnosticism, or any party of zealots. Partiality can be experienced in any denomination, as can respect of persons being the pastor, senior pastor or priest or Pope.

Being rich - this could be seen in the pentecostal churches, prosperity gospel, Catholicism etc.

There is also this concept of a "religious spirit" in Todd's list, which to me is unbiblical, but to your view a religious spirit (as one who takes care of orphans and widows) may be a positive thing?

"A religious spirit can slowly take over, as legal experience and fear of man, more and more, creeps in."

[ZNPaaneah]

I used to take this position that the term cult is not biblical, and the definition in the dictionary is far too broad to be useful.

However, if we take the narrow definition of cult, "a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing" that is Biblical, that is what James refers to as "having the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons" and that is useful.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I used to take this position that the term cult is not biblical, and the definition in the dictionary is far too broad to be useful.

However, if we take the narrow definition of cult, "a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing" that is Biblical, that is what James refers to as "having the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons" and that is useful.

There's no need to tie cults to the Bible. Not to mention that the word cult wasn't in existence until the early 17th century. So the Bible doesn't even mention the word cult.

Still, we should all be aware and concerned that cults exist today. I don't know why but cults are rampant today. The one in the news lately is Nxivm, the women sex slave cult that brands the women. The one made famous by the Smallville star, Allison Mack. Another one is The Children of God, or The Family, another sex cult, infamous for Flirty Fishing. I almost joined that cult before joining the local church. I had/have a friend that was in it.

Since I left the LC cult I've pretty much been obsessed with cults. And in an effort to understand why I joined one, have read many books about different and various forms of them.

Except for the Lee sons, and well Watchman Nee, the LC is not a sex cult. Neither is it a doomsday cult. I consider the LC a cult lite ; like the Jehovah's Witnesses, and LDS Mormons.

The local church is a personality cult ... and its personality cult leader is clearly Witness Lee. There's no denying that.

And we don't need the Bible to prove it. The Bible is used to support it.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by awareness

There's no need to tie cults to the Bible. Not to mention that the word cult wasn't in existence until the early 17th century. So the Bible doesn't even mention the word cult.

Still, we should all be aware and concerned that cults exist today. I don't know why but cults are rampant today. The one in the news lately is Nxivm, the women sex slave cult that brands the women. The one made famous by the Smallville star, Allison Mack. Another one is The Children of God, or The Family, another sex cult, infamous for Flirty Fishing. I almost joined that cult before joining the local church. I had/have a friend that was in it.

Since I left the LC cult I've pretty much been obsessed with cults. And in an effort to understand why I joined one, have read many books about different and various forms of them.

Except for the Lee sons, and well Watchman Nee, the LC is not a sex cult. Neither is it a doomsday cult. I consider the LC a cult lite ; like the Jehovah's Witnesses, and LDS Mormons.

The local church is a personality cult ... and its personality cult leader is clearly Witness Lee. There's no denying that.

And we don't need the Bible to prove it. The Bible is used to support it.

Alluding to the LSM as sex cult (in regards to Lee’s sons and Nee) is quite a stretch Awareness - I think that kind of name calling is more of an Alt-Views topic of discussion.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Alluding to the LSM as sex cult (in regards to Lee’s sons and Nee) is quite a stretch Awareness - I think that kind of name calling is more of an Alt-Views topic of discussion.

Did you misread my post? I think I said :

"Except for the Lee sons, and well Watchman Nee, the LC is not a sex cult."

I'm making a point about what type of cult the LC is, by saying what it's not.

And then pointing out it's cult lite, and is a personality type cult.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

There's no need to tie cults to the Bible.

I agree. I think the verses in James are equally applicable to many situations whether full blown cult, cult lite, or simply whether you have been misled in your Christian walk. These temptations are common to us all, you don't have to be a member of the Manson cult to be profited from these verses.

If you have done something foolish,
If you have been tempted to act contrary to your conscience
If you have stopped being a doer of the word and instead have merely become a listener
If one day you realize you are in a place of confusion and evil works. A place of contention, where the ones you are surrounded by are impossible to be entreated, a place of partiality and hypocrisy.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I agree. I think the verses in James are equally applicable to many situations whether full blown cult, cult lite, or simply whether you have been misled in your Christian walk. These temptations are common to us all, you don't have to be a member of the Manson cult to be profited from these verses.

If you have done something foolish,
If you have been tempted to act contrary to your conscience
If you have stopped being a doer of the word and instead have merely become a listener
If one day you realize you are in a place of confusion and evil works. A place of contention, where the ones you are surrounded by are impossible to be entreated, a place of partiality and hypocrisy.

And then, those of Paul, not Judaizers, like James, that think the book of James is a book of straw ... including Lee.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by awareness

And then, those of Paul, not Judaizers, like James, that think the book of James is a book of straw ... including Lee.

Lee did not think it was a book of straw. That was Luther. Lee wrote a 14 chapter life study on it. Luther wanted to take it out of the Bible. Lee said that Luther was unfair and wrong.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I used to take this position that the term cult is not biblical, and the definition in the dictionary is far too broad to be useful.

However, if we take the narrow definition of cult, "a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing" that is Biblical, that is what James refers to as "having the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons" and that is useful.

I think you are confusing the meaning of partiality (favoritism) with something else (idolatry). The description of "excessive admiration for a particular person or thing" is more like idolatry than partiality. The bible already addresses misplaced admiration of people or things as idolatry. The immediate context of the verse about partiality is wealth and wealthy believers mistreated poor believers (James 1:9–11). Similar ideas, but a little bit different.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I think you are confusing the meaning of partiality (favoritism) with something else (idolatry). The description of "excessive admiration for a particular person or thing" is more like idolatry than partiality. The bible already addresses misplaced admiration of people or things as idolatry. The immediate context of the verse about partiality is wealth and wealthy believers mistreated poor believers (James 1:9–11). Similar ideas, but a little bit different.

9 But let the brother of low degree glory in his high estate: 10 and the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away. 11 For the sun ariseth with the scorching wind, and withereth the grass; and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his goings.

Our high estate is that we are all kings, sons of the King, and heirs of the coming kingdom. Regardless of our position in this world we believers should have our conversation in this world as kings and heirs. Therefore, calling a particular brother "rich" is a red flag. We are all sons of the king and heirs of grace, so how then is this one brother "rich"?

Two possible ways: riches of this world which will fade away and are vanity, or rich with the good gift of God. But since all good gifts come from God it is God that is rich, not this brother. It is of God that you receive this good gift, so thinking that it came from "this rich brother" is an error.

Read the context.

[Evangelical]

You correctly stated the context, being worldly riches, but then you diverge and offer your own out of context interpretation as "word" or "life" and falsely attribute it to "calling someone rich". There is no issue with calling someone rich or poor if that is what he is, even the bible makes that distinction between believers. The issue is showing favoritism because of that condition. Now a cult, may or may not fit that description. A cult which is based on sharing all things in common and each person having relatively few possessions does not fit that description. A cult , such as a "Hollywood cult" might value rich and fame and that verse might then apply to them, but only if they were in a church. The verse does not apply to outsiders, only believers in the church. The one major flaw in Todd's and your approach to "testing cults" is that you apply verses intended for the church, to unbelievers. The only real tests we can apply to unbelievers is the test of faith and test of spirits, to determine if they are genuine believers or not. Beyond that, we cannot apply 10 verses intended for believers to unbelievers, and then determine they are a cult on that basis.

I do not see a problem calling one brother rich in the word if he is, and another poor in the word if he is. The rich brother may spend 3 hours a day in the word and the poor one 5 minutes a week. We cannot call the poor brother "rich in the word" if he is not, that would be a lie. And it is not showing partiality to let the word-rich brother serve more in the church by preaching the word than the word-poor one who is unable to preach the word.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You correctly stated the context, being worldly riches, but then you diverge and offer your own out of context interpretation as "word" or "life" and falsely attribute it to "calling someone rich". There is no issue with calling someone rich or poor if that is what he is, even the bible makes that distinction between believers. The issue is showing favoritism because of that condition.

That is funny. You think referring to someone as "being rich" is not showing favoritism? It doesn't indicate a kind of enviousness which is the context of being drawn away by our lusts?

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Now a cult, may or may not fit that description. A cult which is based on sharing all things in common and each person having relatively few possessions does not fit that description. A cult , such as a "Hollywood cult" might value rich and fame and that verse might then apply to them, but only if they were in a church. The verse does not apply to outsiders, only believers in the church. The one major flaw in Todd's and your approach to "testing cults" is that you apply verses intended for the church, to unbelievers.

My approach to testing cults? Where did you get that? First, I have already pointed out that I do not see the Biblical value in the wider definition of cult referring to a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious. Therefore I do not have an approach for testing such a thing. However, if you take the narrower definition of a great religious devotion to a person, well that is not my test, that is James who warns us of this. I didn't write the book of James, I merely pointed that out.

I do not believe that the book of James is so narrow as to warn us not to get involved with Jim Jones. What I do believe is that it is very difficult to find the narrow road that leads to life and the book of James helps us with that and identifies the things that would lead us astray. Jim Jones is merely an extreme example of such a thing.