Not sure what we are voting for here? An explanation is required.
Voting seems to be on which group the nerds believe is most cult-like.

I agree with your order if the most cult-like are towards the bottom.

Scientology is a religion only for tax purposes but there can be no doubt that it is a cult.

FSM is an alternative theory for Intelligent Design that should be more attractive to kids.

Pretty much anything listed meets a lot of these requirements:

The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
Christ

Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
Just read arguments with “born-again” Christians [or really any other flavor] and the flaming that will ensue if you question, doubt or disagree with them.

Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
Guess this depends if you believe praying falls into this category.

The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
Not sure about JWs or Scientologists, but Heaven’s gate is probably the only one that really meets this criteria

The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
Please. Every religion does this. Christianity and Islam would be big offenders with this a criteria

The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
Like it was word for word taken from the Bible (i.e. it you’re not with me, you’re against me)

The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
Again, except for Heaven’s gate, not sure who this applies to

The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members’ participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
Same as above

The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
Hello Christianity and sin

Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
You know, like when Jesus said that part about hating fathers, mothers, wives and husbands to follow him.

The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
Any group that has missionaries or preaches to those who didn’t seek them out (i.e. pretty much all Christianity)

The group is preoccupied with making money.
I guess that depends on what we agree preoccupied to mean. 10% or tithing? Joel Osteen? Offering plates that are passed around for everyone to see?

Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
Heaven’s Gate… maybe JWs, but I can’t say for certain.

Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
Not enough experience to judge. Again, I assume Heaven’s Gate.

The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.
The first half applies to all of the above. Not sure who the second applies to except again Heaven’s Gate. Or any Christian until failry recently (say last 200 years).

My point, is when one sect doesn’t like another sect the easiest thing way to make others dislike them is to label them a cult. True there are actual cults out there. But to me the only divisions are either the first choice or the last choice. My opinion would tend to “All of these are cults” if any of them are.

Has anyone seen this youtube clip?

Here is a sincere attempt to provide a definition of “cult”. Seems about right to me.

12 Irreconcilable and Inherent Flaws in Orthodox/Evangelical Christianity
By James

1. The foundation of Christian interpretation of the Bible cannot be reconciled with the evidence of the universe itself. The doctrine Creation Ex Nihilo cannot be reconciled with the Laws of Conservation of Matter and Energy, or other existing laws of the universe. Early Christian documents show that Creation Ex Nihilo was invented by Gnostic Christianity and then later adopted by Orthodox Christianity, rather than revealed by Prophets or Apostles. Christian scholars agree that it is not explicitly taught in either the Hebrew or Greek Bibles. Mormonism can be reconciled with the Laws of Conservation of Matter and Energy. In 1833, Joseph Smith revealed Eternalism, or that matter can neither be created or destroyed, as a religious principle, nearly 100 years before science discovered the truth of the proposition. The Quantum vacuum theory of the universe also bears this out.

2. The literal six day creation and a six thousand year old earth cannot be reconciled with modern geology: Multiple independent dating methods disprove a young earth and instead confirm an old earth, millions of years old. Evidences of the earth, the solar system, our galaxy and the universe itself are evidence that traditional Christian interpretation of the Bible cannot be true, because it cannot be reconciled with existence (the evidence of God’s creation.) Mormonism can be reconciled with a 4.6 billion year old earth and a contemporary view of earth science. Joseph Smith revealed through new scripture in 1833, that God created the universe out of existing eternal matter and that the 6 day creation account represents creative periods, not 24 hour days.

3. The Orthodox Christian God that existed for eternity in the past, who recently became a creator six thousand years ago, cannot be reconciled with the Christian definition of absoluteness and perfection. The creation is unnecessary to the being of the Orthodox Trinity and is inconsistent with its unchangeable nature in the eternities. His cessation of creative acts after judgment day is also inconsistent with absoluteness and perfection. Mormonism has no such contradictions. Joseph Smith revealed in 1831 that God has created billions of earths through his Son Jesus Christ for a necessary purpose: for the Father’s happiness and the happiness of his children. These views represent the realities discovered in the universe: the earth and our solar system are relative young creations compared to the rest of the universe. Joseph Smith revealed these truths before the discovery of an old earth, and multiple galaxies in the universe.

4. Orthodox Christian doctrine cannot adequately account for or identify the process of creation and the existence of the hosts of heaven, Lucifer’s former glory, his fall, and the war in heaven. These realities cannot be reasonably reconciled with a literal and strict six 24-hour day creation interpretation. Mormonism can account for the purposes of the creation, why the hosts of heaven exist, Lucifer’s former glory with God, the reasons why he rebelled, his fall, and why God did not destroy him, and the outcome of the war in heaven and every human being’s connection with it; all revealed through modern day scripture from God..

5. Orthodox Christian doctrine cannot adequately account for the existence of human spirits before they were born to earth (including all of the sons of God who shouted for joy when the foundation of the earth was laid, Job 38). (If the angels are considered sons of God, then was Lucifer a son of God too?) Mormonism can account for Job 38 and reveal many truths about the premortal life of mankind. Mormonism can explain why sons of God are shouting for joy when the foundation of the earth was laid before “any sons” had been redeemed by Jesus Christ.

6. The Orthodox Christian God’s lack of prevention of evil, in view of his unlimited power and unlimited knowledge, cannot be reconciled with the Christian definition of absoluteness, perfection, and omnibeneficence. Mormonism can reconcile the age old problem of evil.

7. The Orthodox Trinity doctrine (with its necessary pluralism and strict ontological oneness) cannot be reconciled with the Old Testament or the New Testament. Orthodox Christian doctrine misidentifies the “One” in the Bible as “one ontological being,” a definition that is internally inconsistent with the Bible’s complete witness of “One Godhead.” The Orthodox Trinity is an invention of Catholic Councils in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th centuries, resulting in Creeds that are extra biblical. Modern Christian scholars assert that the definition of God as a single ontological being of three co-equal persons, it is not a part of the biblical witness. Mormonism can be reconciled with the scriptures and can explain the necessary oneness and the three-ness of the Godhead. Joseph Smith revealed the true nature of the Godhead that is in agreement with the eyewitness accounts of God in the New Testament and its necessary doctrines.

8. The Old Testament and New Testaments cannot adequately identify or account for the Orthodox Trinity’s necessary pluralism of three co-equal persons, prior to the creation. In Mormonism, theological oneness and three-ness agree with both the Old and New Testaments. Joseph Smith received a commandment from God to make these distinctions before Bible scholars knew that the Orthodox Trinity was not biblical. Mormon scripture explains what happened to the true doctrine, that has since been reconciled with ancient Christian historical writings.

9. Christian acceptance of extra biblical Creeds cannot be reconciled with, and is a violation of, sola scriptura, or a closed canon doctrine. (If the Creeds are not scripture, then why do Christians measure whether other groups are Christian using it?) In Mormonism, there exists no conflict since 1) Mormonism rejects the Orthodox creeds, and 2) accepts an open canon, just like New Testament Church.

10. The Christian doctrine of a closed canon cannot be reconciled with the Bible itself. See above.

11. The Christian doctrine of biblical inerrancy cannot be reconciled with the Bible. It is not an early Christian doctrine, but a recent invention. (While advocating biblical inerrancy, Christians continue to support major Christian blunders of bible interpretation over the last 18 centuries.) In Mormonism, scribal errors, contradictions, and textual variants do not threaten the faith, since it does not hold to biblical inerrancy. Mormonism accurately teaches that the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

12. The Christian interpretation of a “grace alone” salvation, cannot be reconciled with all of the writings of Paul and the rest of the New Testament witness. Only by ignoring most of the New Testament, can a person assert a “grace alone” salvation. While holding a view of Biblical inerrancy, this is irrational, confused, and contradictory. Mormonism harmonizes all scriptures of the Old and New Testament acknowledging the proper balance between faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism, the gift of the holy ghost, sanctification, remission of sins, make a personal effort to keep commandments, and enduring to the end in faith. The Book of Mormon plainly teaches the way a person takes upon themselves the name of Jesus Christ with a fullness of the covenant of Jesus Christ.

Although Traditional Christianity is popular today, one could argue that it is a cult, set apart from New Testament Christianity.

A simple measurement of cult for me is when the charismatic cult leader starts having sex with his followers because of his power then it’s a cult.

By that measure big pimpin’ Joseph Smith qualifies. Mostly for banging the teens, teenage sisters that he was appointed guardian, and married women and calling them his “wives” qualifies in my book.

Jake D.

// For those LDS believers doubting my statements above read In Sacred Loneliness by Todd Compton or the various publications put out by FARMS, FAIR, or the Mormon History Association.

My question is if it is possible for cults to mature into mainstream religions. And if so, at what point does the change occur? True, maybe Christianity (in general) is not considered a cult, but when it started it was probably viewed that way by the other religions around it.

Is size then all that matters? Length of existence? These don’t seem very good indicators of anything. A truly effective cult would keep building and be around for a while.

What about transitions from one leader to the next?
(This list is accepting each religions view of itself, so please don’t waste my time correcting that Paul didn’t actually take over from Jesus or that there is debate about the Caliphs taking over from Mohammed.)
Christ died, Peter and Paul took over and “led” Christianity.
Mohammed died and Abu Bakr and Ali stepped up.
Charles Russell died and Rutherford took the reins.
Joe Smith died and Brigham Young took over
Hubbard died and David Miscavige became Chairman.
Bobby Henderson is still with us, so FSM remains to be seen.

Again, this doesn’t seem a very good metric either. So my question is if possible, when does cult become accepted religion?

OK i have read quite a few though not all of the responses because well there are way to many of them for me to spend my precious online time to read BUT i wanted to put in one very important thing that seems to be missing from many of the posts. I am going to do this copy and paste style with a link to my source

Quote:
“The Bible was written over a period of 1400 to 1800 years by more than 40 different authors. The Bible is a compilation of 66 separate books, divided into two primary divisions: the Old Testament (containing 39 books) and the New Testament (containing 27 books). It is believed that all of the books of the Bible were written under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. "

My Point:
The bible which is consistently referred to as the only true “holy work” because the others were written by man and that the bible is really “gods word” was in fact written not only by one person but 40! {think it could have been corrupted by those persons own views on life????}

Quote:
“The first five books of the Old Testament (known as the Pentateuch or Torah) was written by Moses”

My Point:
Many people (particularly christians) condemn other religions because there “holy work” was written by a “human prophet” however their original “holy work” was written by alas a HUMAN PROPHET.

I have known this fact for a while and it is kind of upsetting that more people are not aware that the bible was not written by either “God” or “Jesus” but by a human.

So therefore if one of the criteria is that the “holy work” must be written by a “human” than sorry Christianity you meet that criteria for a cult…

here is the source “http://www.allabouttruth.org/when-was-the-bible-written-faq.htm”