question? cult vs religion

whats the difference between a cult and a religion?

 

absolutely nothing.

 

That more or less covers it.

The significant difference (size not really satisfying my definition of "significant") as I see it is that cults tend to involve the worship of a living and present individual, and tend to involve immediate corporeal forms of reinforcement (e.g. physical reward or punishment) which can be meted out at the behest of the cult leader; whereas religions tend to involve the worship of gods, supernatural entities and/or dead and "distant" individuals, and tend to involve non-corporeal reinforcement (e.g. Heaven and Hell) which is not directly meted out during one's life.

There is clearly a distinction between religions and cults - there are very few actual synonyms in English. One can, of course, have as much problem with religions as with cults, but there is definitely a difference that can be identified (sorry littleowl ).

 

oh quite alright, i understand there is, in fact, a clear distinction; it's just that my answer was seasoned with my own cynical feelings and humor about religion.

 

I completely agree with Hoatzin here, but in many cases "cults" are very similar to "religions," only less socially accepted.

 

I guess there's the argument that a religion is just a cult plus one thousand years or so. I haven't seen it happen or not happen, obviously (I'm not that old), but I'm dubious. I think most cults don't have the potential to last long - not much more than a generation after the founder's death. The ones that can do without a living leader I would say have the potential to become more widely accepted religions.

 

not much.

 

everything is a cult if you make it one.

but if your faith is not in imposing assumptions but accepting a kind of universal mystery intrinsic to a kind of universal love instead, then i think it's possible to avoid making it one.

 

That's true. In any group, the group dynamic, one individual at a time, can adopt the defining characteristics of a cult.

I was in a well-known cult back in the early 70s. I know cults, and due to my experiences, I can recognize the elements of a cult when I see them.

Some of the elements of a cult are, for instance,

1)an underlying emphasis on fear based suspension of the individual's personal reasoning ability and rational mind

2)outwardly imposed and encouraged personal deprivation, especially, and firstly, of personal freedoms

3)a strong emphasis on the infallibility of leadership, or of the principle of obedience to leadership

4)a strong tendency to assert peer-based pressure to conform to the group beliefs, in coordination with all of the previous elements.

There are other factors, but basically, a religion exists by means of personal choice of faith, by means of personal revelation, independent of peer pressure to conform. A cult, however, is formed from the negation of choice, suspension of personal faith, and a willingness to adopt the alleged faith of others as one's own. Freedom is suppressed.

Go for freedom. Have faith to yourself. Be a beacon, not a mirror.

 

Size, religions are cults with more people.

 

most religions are cults. all cults are religions.

 

Public acceptance is the only difference.

Organized religions are just cults that have a great enough following to have power in our societies.

This part is totally right;

Sound like any 'religions' you know?

Maybe it would be better to ask, do you know of any organized religion that doesn't do those things?

 

my cult is a religion. your religion is a cult.
its just an egocentric playing with words.
period.
that's all it is.

but you don't NEED a "cult" or a "religion" to have a real faith.
only a willingness to love what you don't know,
and know that you don't have to pretend to know what is not known,
in order to have a genuine love and affection for it.

 

The way I see it, it's an issue of control.

The control by a cult is directly identifiable to outsiders, it usually has physical and immediate consequence - such as cutting one off from their families, or punishing members corporeally.

The control by a religion is more subtle with less direction and usually less effect.

 

A cult is an organization or fellowship whose communion with is inherently detrimental or harmful to the member.
This is not the basis nor an accurate description for religion. Religion is simply a set of beliefs about life, the notion of Self, and reality. Nothing makes beliefs necessarily harmful, and if they are not harmful (as is the case with many religions), then they are not indicative of a cult.

 

That all depends on your perspective of what is inherently detrimental or harmful to the manner.

Something that may not seem harmful to a believer, may be considered so by a non-beleiver.

The only difference between a cult and a religion is public acceptance.

 

The difference between cults and religions is not all cults are based on things that are made up.

Oh, and as nice guy Tom said (new nickname, say Zobra's sig ), it really is public acceptance.

 

Not all religions are either based totally on fiction either though, and therein lies the problem of trying to differentiate between the two.

Keep in mind that religions/cults and spirituality are not the same.

 

The reason I can't agree with setting public acceptance as the standard of differentiation between cult and religion is because it only works from the standpoint of modernity and from the perspective of the modern observer.
For instance, if we try to retroactively label communities as "cult" or "religion", the standards and acceptance change with the times and place. The acts of the Inquisition would not be considered acceptable today, even though they were in the early years of Christianity. And I'm sure eastern religions like Buddhism and Hinduism would be considered some kind of cult in Europe in the 1700s.
"Public acceptance" is a very nebulous thing that changes not only with the times, but also across various populations all living at the same time. It isn't really an idealistic or logical standard to apply to something like this.
Just because someone considers a religious belief harmful doesn't mean it really is.

 

Religions have been known to be detrimental and they have also been known to be psychologically beneficial. Modern psychologists have recognized this and have applied it to the ways they treat their patient.

I guess it mostly depends on how the individual responds to the religion and how that religion is applied.

Cults usually have a set of criteria:
http://www.ehow.com/how_2053385_identify-religious-cult.html